At 07:40 PM 10/2/2008 +0900, David Cournapeau wrote:
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>
> I think install tools should handle it and keep it out of developers'
> hair. We should of course distinguish configuration and other
> writable data from static data, not to mention documentation. Any
> other file-related info is going to have to be optional, if that. I
> don't really think it's a good idea to ask developers to fill in
> information they don't understand. A developer who works entirely on
> Windows, for example, is not going to have a clue what to specify for
> FHS stuff, and they absolutely shouldn't have to if all they're doing
> is including some static data.
I may be missing something, but why should the developer even care about
FHS ? We should not standardize what goes where, but the kind of data
needed to be installed (doc, etc...), and then have different
(pluggable) implementations to put those where they should.
Yep - that's precisely what I've proposed. We just need to define
those categories in such a way as to minimize the burden on a Python developer.
Where data files are concerned, however, a developer should only need
to distinguish between read-only, read-write, and samples, because
any finer-grained distinction that relies on platform-specific
concepts (like locale directories) is probably going to be error-prone.
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
