On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 26 Aug 2013 07:00, "Donald Stufft" <don...@stufft.io> wrote: >> >> >> On Aug 25, 2013, at 4:51 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Anyway, I like Paul's suggestion of defining a specific runtime format >>> for this, even if it's just "wheel layout plus a RECORD file". I'm currently >>> thinking of using the ".dist" suffix, matching the existing egg vs egg-info >>> naming convention. >> >> >> It seems to me the easiest thing to do is just continue using eggs for >> this feature for now especially if the proposal is just standardizing what >> eggs do and doesn't offer any benefits besides standardization. That gets >> you all the benefits sans standardization and doesn't spend time putting a >> PEP through (and all the back and forth that entails) for something that >> already works when we can spend the time on stuff that still needs actual >> design work. > > Egg based multi-version installs still suffer from the problem of lacking a > RECORD file so you need an external tool to manage them properly.
Well, I'd argue that eggs are effectively also records. You can find out what's installed by simply looking at the names in whatever directory you put eggs. The harder part, of course, is deciding when an egg is no longer needed. I assume the RECORD file doesn't address that either. Note that with multi-version support, uninstalling things is an optimization, not a necessity. The only harm a never-uninstalled egg does is take up space and maybe make tools that scan for what's installed take more time. Jim -- Jim Fulton http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimfulton _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
