> Data that's consumed by the code absolutely belongs in eggs > and shouldn't be strewn all over the place
Totally agree. even if this means I've contradicted my self some where along the line. > the *reason* that pkg_resources doesn't > support egg root relative resource names is because it won't work right > with system packaging tools like RPM, Debian, etc. ah. food for thought. thanks. > is currently missing is support for packaging up dynamic libraries Oh, I've been to timid to even consider trying that. But mixed language development needs is something I very nearly mentioned in last post. I had games development in mind[1]. I just can't see how far it is reasonable to expect 'stock' egg/setuptools to stretch. I mean where would it all end: pydselect, pje nervous break down ? > Egg format extensions are already provided for by entry points and > the EGG-INFO metadata dir So if I decide I really care about referencing data in this way: investigating adding setup keywords, files to EGG-INFO and inventing my own rules is the way to go ? Hrm, time to pull down the the setuptools trunk I think ;-) Thanks, Robin [1] The small number of uk games developers I've worked for use lua and C++. And wouldn't dream of using a packaging system they did not write them selves. _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
