Tarek Ziadé a écrit : > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 3:32 PM, kiorky <kio...@cryptelium.net> wrote:
>> And also, to use them together, what a hell. For package A i need 0.6 (hard
>> requirement), for package B i need 0.7 (hard requirement), for C i need 0.6.
>> C
>> depend on A which depends on B. I also have no sort of control over the
>> maintenance of those products, think that the authors are dead.
>> So, i ll have to manually install B for A to fulfill its requirements then C
>> will install. Deployments will be simple :)
>
> It seems that you make the false assumption that a system can't have 0.6 and
> 0.7
No, this is not the case.
> at the same time. The "setuptools" package does not exists in 0.7 for example
> they are mutualy distinct.
This may be quite current even if it's not a good habit to have circular
dependencies between distributions.
Imagine that.
B(0.7) -> A(0.6).
A(0.6) -> B(0.7).
Can i have the same namespace "ns" shared between the twice distributions with
both the setuptools namespaces implementation (A) and the pkg_util's one (B)?
"Have" mean that i can import ns in both distributions.
So, if:
* I have old distributions with C code even not declaring they are
relying on
setuptools, installing with the 0.6 code automatically.
* I have entry points and namespaces from 0.7 available to import in
0.6 and
vice-versa.
I will see no more objections.
Another related thing, as i read the pep376 implementation, it may be good and
easy to provide some wrappers to some setuptools very used objects like
WorkingSet or Environment as similary code is already implemented to smoothly
migrate existing code.
>
> Tarek
--
--
Cordialement,
KiOrKY
GPG Key FingerPrint: 0x1A1194B7681112AF
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
