Hi, Since i also started to depend on py.path, i started to think about making it a standalone library.
Since this would also help me to make py.path a more suitable base for anyvc, as well as a good runtime dependency for kij and pida i'm obviously in favor. How do others think about such a change? Regards, Ronny On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 21:03 +0100, holger krekel wrote: > On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 11:46 -0500, William McVey wrote: > > So, I've been running py-1.0.2 for quite a while. I'm now trying to > > upgrade my code to use the current py library (1.2.1) and standalone > > execnet. I'm curious whether the removal of the iterator functionality > > on os.path.local() objects was intentional. I read through the > > changelog, and didn't see anything other than: > > > > 1.0.2 -> 1.1.0 > > * simplified internal localpath implementation > > not very detailed, sorry. > iterator got removed because there should be only one way to do it > and "listdir()" does what the iterator does already. > > > To me though, I would have expected the API to stay consistent though. > > In retrospect it's maybe questionable to remove the iterator (and the > __contains__ method). To be honest i am never quite sure how many > people depend on py.path as opposed to py.test. > > > -- William > > > > P.S. Perhaps I missed it, but Py lib's website doesn't seem to give a > > link to a public code repository for the Py lib. I eventually found it > > (I think) under Holger's bitbucket account. > > I think that > > http://codespeak.net/py/dist/install.html > > has several pointers to the hg repository or did you look > at other docs? > > cheers, > holger _______________________________________________ py-dev mailing list py-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/py-dev
