Martin v. Löwis wrote: > I hope Python won't copy CPAN literally. Every time I used it, it was > a big pain, and I happily stopped using it when everything I needed > came as a Debian package.
Note my emphasis on `culturally` in the previous mail. CPAN's largest value isn't as a package management system, but as an actual canonical repository of useful Perl code, large and small. So my three propositions here are: 1) Having a large, canonical repository of useful Python code that's much more encompassing than Cheeseshop would be a good thing for Python. 2) It appears the way to create and maintain such a repository is to ingrain it into the language culture, whereby it becomes unusual that useful redistributable code /isn't/ in the repository. 3) To address 1) and 2), we need a canonical package layout and build/install/test cycle that are easy for developers to work with, well-documented, and for which there exist better and less arcane tools than what we have now. -- Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | GPG: 0x147C722D _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
