-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10/30/2011 06:28 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 12:10:18 +0000 (UTC) > Vinay Sajip <vinay_sa...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> We already have Unix shell scripts and BAT files in the source tree. Is >>> it really complicated to maintain these additional shell scripts? Is >>> there a lot of code in them? >> >> No, they're pretty small: wc -l gives >> >> 76 posix/activate (Bash script, contains deactivate() function) >> 31 nt/activate.bat >> 17 nt/deactivate.bat >> >> The question is whether we should stop at that, or whether there should be >> support for tcsh, fish etc. such as virtualenv provides. > > I don't think we need additional support for more or less obscure > shells. > Also, if posix/activate is sufficiently well written (don't ask me > how :-)), it should presumably be compatible with all Unix shells?
I have no problem including the basic posix/nt activate scripts if no one else is concerned about the added maintenance burden there. I'm not sure that my cross-shell-scripting fu is sufficient to write posix/activate in a cross-shell-compatible way; I use bash and am not very familiar with other shells. If it runs under /bin/sh is that sufficient to make it compatible with "all Unix shells" (for some definition of "all")? If so, I can work on this. Carl -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk6uw80ACgkQ8W4rlRKtE2e0AACcCGqxp/HWxX0UAqtS9W5y+UDr weAAnjF4YdsCUvb4bXFloEGt1b7KlvWB =2bd+ -----END 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