On 20 July 2015 at 11:42, Leonardo Rochael Almeida leoroch...@gmail.com wrote:
To solve this problem, so far we've only been able to come up with two
extremes:
- Have the libraries contain enough metadata in their source form that we
can generate true system packages from them (this doesn't
On 20 July 2015 at 18:37, Chris Barker chris.bar...@noaa.gov wrote:
sure -- but isn't that use-case already supported by wheel -- define your
own wheelhouse that has the ABI you know you need, and point pip to it.
I presume the issue is wanting to have a single shared wheelhouse for
a
On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
However, Nate has a specific concrete problem in needing to get
artifacts from Galaxy's build servers and installing them into their
analysis environments - let's help him solve that, on the assumption
that some *other*
On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 10:50 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
The intended use case is Build once, deploy many times.
This is especially important for use cases like Nate's - Galaxy has
complete control over both the build environment and the deployment
environment, but they
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/17/2015 11:46 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Due to the fact Linux binary wheels don't exist, conda is even more
useful on Linux...
FWIW, they exist, they just can't be published to PyPI. Private indexes
(where binary compatibility is a known
