On 10/3/06, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 10:43 PM 10/3/2006 +0100, Paul Moore wrote: > >On 10/3/06, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Should we make more effort to create a usable command-line experience on > >>Windows? Perhaps use a post-install script to register easy_install so it > >>works from "Start/Run", with an automatic pause to prevent the opened > >>console window from closing when it finishes running? Should we include > >>optional registration for the ``.egg`` extension so downloading or > >>double-clicking an egg installs it? > > > >IMHO, no. Your particular suggestions would annoy me immensely, > > Are you sure? Two points here, that I think you're not noticing: > > 1. Registering an "App Paths" entry for easy_install would simply make it > *possible* to type "easy_install" in the Start/Run box and have it > work. It wouldn't force you to use it, and seems quite unlikely to > conflict with anything else. (It could also be made optional, as per point > #2.) > I'll like that, on windows normally I open cmd then run easy_install, very annoying. if I undestand it correctly will be the same that python.exe does.
> 2. I said *optional* registration of the ``.egg`` extension; the idea would > be that you'd have a dialog come up at the end of the .win32.exe run, to > ask you if you wanted to add it. > > So, unless you're saying that having the *options* to do these things would > annoy you, I don't understand your statement. > +1 > > >>* The new install procedure bypasses firewall issues for installing > >>setuptools itself, but doesn't do anything about the issue for packages > >>that have dependencies. Is there anything else that can be done about that? great feature thanks. > > > >I've not worked with enough such packages to know the answer to this > >without asking, but is there an incantation which says "check > >dependencies, if all are present install, otherwise list the missing > >dependencies and stop". If that's available, users can manually > >download what they need. That is minimal, but effective - in my view, > >simplicity is a virtue here. > that sounds like Red Hat dependency hell to me. > Well, keep in mind that such a thing would only work for *one* level of > dependencies; if your dependencies have dependencies you'll go through that > repeatedly. > > But I could perhaps add a --no-deps option to "install" that would do the > trick. easy_install already has a --no-deps option, but it currently > doesn't *display* the dependency list; it probably should. It also doesn't > stop the installation process. > > One minor issue: dependency checking currently takes place *after* the > primary egg is installed, and changing that is too big a refactoring to > happen in the remaining time until the 0.6 release. But it's definitely > something to think about for 0.7. > I don't see why that's a problem you should install setuptools then get the deps of all the other packages, that's why everything depends on setuptools in a implicit way. > _______________________________________________ > Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig > _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
