On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 12:24:32PM -0700, Marek Szuba wrote: -> On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 08:44:10 -0700 -> "C. Titus Brown" <c...@msu.edu> wrote: -> -> > I would like to register a -> > stylistic objection to the presence of anything other than 'setup.py' -> > and 'README.txt' in the top-level directory -- anything else confuses -> > people! -> Could you elaborate? Personally I've never had such problems and as -> far as most software packages I have seen, both Open Source and -> commercial, not released as a single-file self-installer tend to come -> with rather crowded top-level directories...
Well, then they're wrong ;). The python distribution comes only with directories, a README, a LICENSE file, and things required for building. If there is no good reason to put something in the top level directory, then why is it there? We have a hierarchy -- let's use it! Anything else demands people's attention when they are looking for a place to start. I'll supplement that response with a question: what harm is there in hiding things that aren't of immediate utility to every user or necessary for basic functionality? -> That aside, I agree pygrrc.example could find a better home than the -> top-level directory - perhaps, given how easy it seems to be to extract -> code and code-related content from REST, we should simply merge it into -> documentation? Sure; or maybe in 'doc' or 'examples'? -> > In particular, I think setup.cfg and GPL could be moved elsewhere. -> > setup.cfg is still completely wrong, too, which doesn't help... -> -> setup.cfg: No can do, AFAIK setuptools only look for this file in the -> current directory - which in our case will be wherever setup.py resides. Alas, I will buy this argument only when it contains useful information. Right now it's *wrong*, in addition to being ugly and a distraction to me. (Who is Zach Fierstadt, anyway? And what's with the SourceForge text? Is anyone building RPMs, anyway?) If this information can be incorporated elsewhere (like in setup.py) then I would suggest that it be put there. I'm amenable to keeping setup.cfg around in the main directory iff it's correct; otherwise I think it should go until it is corrected. -> GPL: The convention for Open Source projects is to keep the -> software-licence file in the top-level directory and I think we should -> keep following this convention. citation? ;) In any case, 'GPL' should be called 'LICENSE' or 'LICENSE.txt' and referred to in the README. My goal is lack of ambiguity. -> > I also think README should be moved to README.txt, because mime types -> > are well defined for .txt and that helps Windows folk and Web viewers. -> -> Myself I disagree but only because of personal preferences, not any -> objective reasons. This has real functional consequences -- have you ever tried double-clicking on a file named 'README' on a Windows 98 platform? (I'm purposely lowballing the Windows version number -- this may be true through XP.) Old Web servers that fail to serve good default mime types may also lead to downloading README rather than opening it. Basically, .txt unambiguously signals that it's a text file to all and sundry. That's a good thing! opinionatedly yours, --titus -- C. Titus Brown, c...@msu.edu --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pygr-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to pygr-dev@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pygr-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pygr-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
