On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 5:49 AM, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2009/10/20 Chris Withers <ch...@simplistix.co.uk>: >> I wouldn't have a problem if integrating with the windows package manager >> was an optional extra, but I think it's one of many types of package >> management that need to be worried about, so might be easier to get the >> others working and let anyone who wants anything beyond a pure-python >> packaging system that works across platforms, regardless of whether binary >> extensions are needed, do the work themselves... > > There are many (I believe) Windows users for whom bdist_wininst is > just what they want. For those people, where's the incentive to switch > in what you propose? You're not providing the features they currently > have, and frankly "do the work yourself" is no answer (not everyone > can, often for entirely legitimate reasons).
I am not so familiar with msi or wininst internals, but isn't it possible to install w.r.t. a given prefix ? Basically, making it possible to use a wininst in a virtualenv if required (in which case I guess it would not register with the windows db - at least it should be possible to disable it). The main problem with bdist_wininst installers is that they don't work with setuptools dependency stuff (at least, that's the reason given by windows users for a numpy egg on windows, whereas we used to only provide an exe). But you could argue it is a setuptools pb as much as a wininst pb, I guess. David _______________________________________________ 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
