Tres Seaver wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> Chris Withers wrote:
>> Hanno Schlichting wrote:
>>>> The confusion surrounding PIL almost makes me want to write some sort of 
>>>> ├╝ber
>>>> document listing the orginal problem along with all the various 
>>>> hack-arounds.
>>> Both of these show you the exact problem the official distribution has
>>> with setuptools. It uses a package name of '', 
>> How'd you figure that?
>> Line 48 and 480 of PIL 1.1.7's would suggest it uses a package 
>> name of "PIL"...
>>> As this is a repackaging of a specific version of PIL, it needs to be
>>> done again for each new release. So far we only had a repackaging of
>>> the 1.1.6 version, I contributed one for 1.1.7 now.
>> I would hazard a guess that none of the above are needed anymore ;-)
> You would be wrong, as you would know if you had tried running the
> effbot's packages inside an eggified environment:  he is actively
> hostile to changes which would make this all go away, which leaves us
> with the necessity of forking his release.

ch...@server2:~$ python --no-site-packages test_pil
New python executable in test_pil/bin/python
Installing setuptools.............................done.
ch...@server2:~$ cd test_pil/
ch...@server2:~/test_pil$ source bin/activate
(test_pil)ch...@server2:~/test_pil$ easy_install PIL
Running PIL-1.1.7/ -q bdist_egg --dist-dir 
WARNING: '' not a valid package name; please use only.-separated package 
names in
Finished processing dependencies for PIL
(test_pil)ch...@server2:~/test_pil$ python
 >>> import Image
 >>> Image.__file__

Yeah, the warning is a wart, but what's the problem?
Has anyone tried asking Fred politely before?
I did this a while back about the name of the distribution file and he 
was happy to change it to make things work for setuptools.
What's he's not happy about is people ranting at him about a tool he 
doesn't use or care about ;-)

I dunno if changing the package name is going to be an easy thing for 
him to do..



Repoze-dev mailing list

Reply via email to