2009/7/28 David Lyon <david.l...@preisshare.net>: > On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 07:55:11 +0200, "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de> > wrote: >> Yes, eggs have the same problem. That's one of the reasons they >> don't get integrated into Python. > > Yes but egg_info is included in python... > > and the egg is not.... > > Hence, what goes in and what doesn't isn't always that rational. I'm > just accepting that for the moment.
egg_info data is in to allow "standard" (setup.py install and hence OS package manager managed) packages to provide metadata in a discoverable way. Using a format that is (reasonably) compatible with setuptools is simply a matter of co-operating with existing de facto standards. Eggs themselves (as a distribution format) are just zip files with a funny extension, and as such are supported by Python. The infrastructure and philosophy around eggs (easy_install, the various .pth file manipulations, multi-version installs, etc) are supported by Python (in the trivial sense that they are possible) but are not "blessed" by standard library inclusion, precisely because of the issues being mentioned here. Your package manager has the same issues as the egg infrastructure (lack of integration with system package managers being the biggest one) and so is not suitable for the standard library in precisely the same way. Paul. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
