On Apr 26, 2010, at 04:56 PM, Robert Kern wrote: >On 4/26/10 4:46 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: >> On Apr 26, 2010, at 09:39 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote: >> >>> You should be permissive on that one. Until we know how to describe resource >>> files properly, __file__ is what developer use when they need their projects >>> to be portable.. >> >> Until then, isn't pkg_resources the best practice for this? (I'm pretty sure >> we've talked about this before.) > >I don't think the OP is really speaking against using __file__ per se, but >rather putting data into the package however it is accessed. The >Linux-packager preferred practice is to install into the appropriate >/usr/shared/ subdirectory. Writing portable libraries (with portable >setup.py files!) is difficult to do that way, though.
Tarek pointed to the rest page that captured some of the thinking on this developed at Pycon. There's really two sides to it - what does the programmer write and how does that integrate with the system? I really don't think the developer should go through any contortions to make it work right for the platform. For one thing, there's no way they can do it for every platform their code might end up on. It's a lose to attempt it. Tarek's design allows for separation of concerns and indirection so the programmer can worry about the parts they care about, and the platform packagers can worry about the parts they care about. -Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 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
