On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 9:31 PM, PJ Eby <p...@telecommunity.com> wrote: ... >> What we can do however >> is to see what bdist_egg does and define a new bdist command inspired by >> it, but without zipping, pkg_resource calls, etc. > > Why? If you just want a dumb bdist format, there's already bdist_dumb. > Conversely, if you want a smarter format, why reinvent wheels?
Just to make sure we're on the same page here. PEP 376 provide the installation format for the 'future' -- http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0376/ Introducing back another *installation* format would be against the goal we've initially had with PEP 376 : have a single installation format all tools out there would support, for the sake of standardization of interoperability. (and for consumers in other communities) So, while 'eggs' are interesting as plugins for a given application (that was the initial use case right ?), please do not consider them as an installation format for Python. Now for a binary archive, that would get installed ala PEP 376, why not ? I'd just be curious to have someone list the advantage of having a project released that way besides the "importable as-is" feature. Cheers Tarek -- Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org _______________________________________________ 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
