David Lyon wrote:
On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 09:18:50 +0100, Chris Withers <ch...@simplistix.co.uk>
wrote:
<mini rant>
If Python had a packaging system *and* used it for the standard library, then things like this wouldn't be a problem... The setup.cfg could just say "requires sqlite greater than version x.y.z", and if it was in the standard library, it would be used unless a newer version was needed.

+1

Actually, this was already discussed on this mailing list.

Yeah, I know, but I had memories of it be poo-poo'ed on Python-Dev...
(CC'ing so they can tell me I'm wrong ;-) )

I suggested that a "requires" section could easily do this, something
along the lines of:

[Requires]
stdlib=sqlite>=1.5

Tarek, How are requirements spelled for packages in your current setup.cfg?

I really don't see why anything should be different for standard library packages (ie: the stdlib= prefix in David's example). Python distributions should just declare all the versions they come with in the same way that whatever-is-being-built by Tarek can introspect in the same way as any other package...

So the concept of having an if/else test for this is superfluous.

Right.

It would also mean it would be possible to release bug fix versions of the standard library packages without having to roll a whole python release.

+1

...which in turn would mean that the standard library is no longer a place where packages go to die...

Better yet, since "python" should be a package as far as the packaging system is concerned, library versions can just say what versions of python they work with.

+1 - good idea

...and for me, the "python" package should be just another package in the distributions dance, called "python" ;-)

cheers,

Chris

--
Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting
           - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to