Hi Jim,
Did you get a chance to validate the issue I reported here?
In any case, where should I put it so it doesn't get lost?
cheers,
Chris
Chris Withers wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Chris Withers <ch...@simplistix.co.uk>
wrote:
Hi All,
What is the expected behaviour when the following are all true:
- default.cfg has a develop key
- buildout.cfg has a develop key, and extends a base.bfg
- base.cfg has a develop key
My hope is that all 3 should be set unioned for the develop options.
However, my experience so far is that, at the least, the one in
default.cfg
is ignored...
When a file extends another, it's options *override* options in the
...except extends, which does appear to overlay, right?
extended file unless you use += in the extending file, as in:
develop += foo
Hmm, okay, I think there's a bug lurking, please see attached .tgz
When I run the buildout in package1, only package1's folde ends up being
develop'ed.
The key appears to be the += for the develop key in base.bfg. If I
change that to just =, the behaviour seems as expected.
However, The += was very deliberate, so as to allow develop paths to be
specified user-wide in default.cfg, based on your advice above.
Interestingly, any paths in default.cfg's develop *do* end up being used
in the attached example.
Where/how should I report this?
cheers,
Chris
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
