2009/10/8 Carl Meyer c...@meyerloewen.net:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Gediminas Paulauskas wrote:
Debian's Apt has this capability, see
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackageDependencyManagement . It keeps a
separate file to track the manually installed packages, and the flag
kiorky wrote:
Hi Lennart,
If i read 'virtualenv-distribute 1.3.4.2 on pypi'
I can do some googling or even do some Pypi searching for
'virtualenv-distribute'.
Thus, the first link found may be [1].
On this link, the second sentence is:
The fork was started by Philip Jenvey at
Reinout van Rees wrote:
I'm still not 100% sure whether it is safe to put distribute in the
install_requires list of a package right now, however.
As with setuptools, why do you think you need to?
Chris
___
Distutils-SIG maillist -
Reinout van Rees wrote:
- Do my libraries have to list a dependency on distribute or on setuptools?
Everything zopish has a 'setuptools = 0.6c9' in it.
They shouldn't, unless you only require setuptools after your package is
installed and don't use it in your setup.py, which seems unlikely.
Ian Bicking wrote:
I can imagine adding a little information, basically a log of when and
why and who installed the package. For instance:
agent: pip 0.5
install-date: 2009-10-08T13:44:00UTC
installed-for-user: False
installed-for-package: OtherPackage==0.3
I think this is a great
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
1- we ship 0.7 under a new name - e.g. like distribute2
You could even take the opportunity to rename it completely to something
that makes sense ;-)
To re-iterate my argument: Distribute doesn't distribute anything. If
anything was to be called Distribute, it'd be the
Sridhar Ratnakumar wrote:
This release includes a new packaging tool by activestate called Python
Package Manager (PyPM).
Is PyPM available separately?
Here's a sample command line output::
$ pypm install lxml
Where does this get lxml from?
How can I control that?
Where does this put
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
1- we ship 0.7 under a new name - e.g. like distribute2
You could even take the opportunity to rename it completely to something
that makes sense ;-)
To re-iterate my argument: Distribute doesn't
2009/10/9 Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk:
Why are there effectively 3 forks on virtualenv now, just to get it to use
distribute? Is it really so hard to work with Ian Bicking to be the real
virtualenv using distribute instead of setuptools
Well I would expect Ian to want to take it a bit
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
kiorky wrote:
Hi Lennart,
If i read 'virtualenv-distribute 1.3.4.2 on pypi'
I can do some googling or even do some Pypi searching for
'virtualenv-distribute'.
Thus, the first link found may be [1].
On this
Chris Withers kirjoitti:
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
1- we ship 0.7 under a new name - e.g. like distribute2
You could even take the opportunity to rename it completely to
something that makes sense ;-)
While I agree that the name was badly chosen (for reasons you outline
below), a name change at
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Reinout van Rees wrote:
- Do my libraries have to list a dependency on distribute or on
setuptools?
Everything zopish has a 'setuptools = 0.6c9' in it.
They shouldn't, unless you only require setuptools after your
Hi Chris,
As far as i know, we just give links for power users/developers to know how to
find the actual related repositories.
It s *CLEARLY* specified *IN THE HOMEPAGE METADATA* that the official thing
lives inside florian branch. Those are not 3 forks, but 3 branches or the same
code. And the
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 2:03 PM, kiorky kio...@cryptelium.net wrote:
AND no, virtualenv must continue to provide setuptools, backward
compatibility,
you know?
The *whole* point of Distribute 0.6.x is to be backward compatible, meaning
that if virtualenv switch to it, you will not even notice
Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk writes:
Why are there effectively 3 forks on virtualenv now, just to get it to
use distribute? Is it really so hard to work with Ian Bicking to be
the real virtualenv using distribute instead of setuptools, especially
in the way of the bdfl pronouncement?
2009/10/9 Tarek Ziadé ziade.ta...@gmail.com:
I think the word fork here, in DVCS principles, just means that you
copy a repository
to work with, and eventually ask for the main repo to merge the changes.
Yeah, it's just a branch, basically. But it is hard to get an overview.
--
Lennart
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Sridhar Ratnakumar wrote:
This release includes a new packaging tool by activestate called Python
Package Manager (PyPM).
Is PyPM available separately?
I had been asked for pre-release feedback on PyPM and suggested
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn zo...@zooko.com wrote:
What we do in the Tahoe-LAFS project is we don't count down to a future
version, we only count up from a past version. This is also what Twisted
does (no coincidence -- we probably got the idea from them).
To
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Lennart Regebro rege...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/10/9 Tarek Ziadé ziade.ta...@gmail.com:
The *whole* point of Distribute 0.6.x is to be backward compatible, meaning
that if virtualenv switch to it, you will not even notice it.
I guess the point is that is should
Hi tarek,
Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
The *whole* point of Distribute 0.6.x is to be backward compatible, meaning
that if virtualenv switch to it, you will not even notice it.
Living in my 0.6.x snail sandbox is not a solution.
As it seems that Distribute 0.7 won't for a long time.
setuptools
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 2:43 PM, kiorky kio...@cryptelium.net wrote:
Hi tarek,
Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
The *whole* point of Distribute 0.6.x is to be backward compatible, meaning
that if virtualenv switch to it, you will not even notice it.
Living in my 0.6.x snail sandbox is not a solution.
Ian Bicking i...@colorstudy.com writes:
So after creating, say, version 0.3.1, I always mark a package as
0.3.2dev.
Why not just mark it 0.3.2 during development, and change the version
string in a later revision if warranted?
But this is annoying, you might never create a version 0.3.2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Gediminas Paulauskas wrote:
For backwards compatibility already installed packages have to be
treated as manually installed, because it is not known why they were
installed. So the presence of a new file or flag has to signify that
it was
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
I would say REQUESTED due to my arguments for not recording
installed-as-package-dependency.
REQUESTED is fine, but I don't understand how the arguments apply, given
that I'm not proposing to record information like _which_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Withers wrote:
Ian Bicking wrote:
I can imagine adding a little information, basically a log of when and
why and who installed the package. For instance:
agent: pip 0.5
install-date: 2009-10-08T13:44:00UTC
installed-for-user: False
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Jim Fulton j...@zope.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:57 AM, Hanno Schlichting ha...@hannosch.eu wrote:
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
I assume most packages Reinout uses (like all zope.* packages) use
namespace
Carl Meyer kirjoitti:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
I would say REQUESTED due to my arguments for not recording
installed-as-package-dependency.
REQUESTED is fine, but I don't understand how the arguments apply, given
that I'm not proposing to
On 12:25 pm, be...@zope.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn zo...@zooko.com
wrote:
What we do in the Tahoe-LAFS project is we don't count down to a
future
version, we only count up from a past version. This is also what
Twisted
does (no coincidence -- we
Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 2:43 PM, kiorky kio...@cryptelium.net wrote:
Hi tarek,
Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
The *whole* point of Distribute 0.6.x is to be backward compatible, meaning
that if virtualenv switch to it, you will not even notice it.
Living in my 0.6.x snail
kiorky kirjoitti:
Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 2:43 PM, kiorky kio...@cryptelium.net wrote:
Hi tarek,
Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
The *whole* point of Distribute 0.6.x is to be backward compatible, meaning
that if virtualenv switch to it, you will not even notice
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 3:32 PM, kiorky kio...@cryptelium.net wrote:
Why they can't ?
As i understood all those readings, packages for 0.6 and 0.7 will be
installable
with the appropriate distribute version, thus side by side, but for me, they
may
be incompatibles together.
They may be ?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alex wrote:
REQUESTED is fine, but I don't understand how the arguments apply, given
that I'm not proposing to record information like _which_ package it was
a dependency of. The same single bit (literally) of information is
tracked either
On 01:45 pm, c...@dirtcircle.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alex wrote:
REQUESTED is fine, but I don't understand how the arguments apply,
given
that I'm not proposing to record information like _which_ package it
was
a dependency of. The same single bit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
By doing this, I think you're dooming any Python package uninstaller to
be unpleasantly slow.
The process of searching for orphaned packages may be relatively slow on
a system with many installed packages. I'm not
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
work on the UCS2/UCS4 build problem in PyPM. As a result the following
has been noted (http://workspace.activestate.com/sridharr/pypm/ticket/83):
Jan further commented that we should not be bothering to make PyPM
work with custom builds of Python other than ActivePython
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
I think the word fork here, in DVCS principles, just means that you
copy a repository
to work with, and eventually ask for the main repo to merge the changes.
So what's the main repo?
What one of these three options should someone looking to use
virtualenv-distribute
kiorky wrote:
Lennart Regebro a écrit :
2009/10/9 Tarek Ziadé ziade.ta...@gmail.com:
The *whole* point of Distribute 0.6.x is to be backward compatible, meaning
that if virtualenv switch to it, you will not even notice it.
I guess the point is that is should still work even if you don't want
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
I assume most packages Reinout uses (like all zope.* packages) use
namespace packages. So they actually do depend during runtime on the
pkg_resources module, which happens to be available from either the
distribute or setuptools distribution. So one of them should be
Carl Meyer wrote:
The downside here is that it introduces one more wrinkle for installers
to worry about handling correctly.
How so?
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
Sorry I won't run a new poll again, Distribute is the name.
Besides, it's already on page #1 on google when I type 'python
disribute' or 'distribute python'
*shrugs*
I will state now that I will fight tooth and nail before anything called
distribute gets into the stdlib
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Withers wrote:
Carl Meyer wrote:
The downside here is that it introduces one more wrinkle for installers
to worry about handling correctly.
How so?
Write some more metadata, figure out whether to write it to
already-installed packages,
exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
I'm not sure how zooko does this for Tahoe, but with Twisted (with which
we don't do betas but we do do pre-releases) if we were to start
getting ready for 2.0.0, then we would create a release branch and
change the version in that release branch to 2.0.0pre1.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
Sorry I won't run a new poll again, Distribute is the name.
Besides, it's already on page #1 on google when I type 'python
disribute' or 'distribute python'
*shrugs*
I will state now that I
Chris Withers a écrit :
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
I think the word fork here, in DVCS principles, just means that you
copy a repository
to work with, and eventually ask for the main repo to merge the changes.
So what's the main repo?
What one of these three options should someone looking to
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 09:21:29AM -0400, Carl Meyer wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Withers wrote:
The downside here is that it introduces one more wrinkle for installers
to worry about handling correctly. There are strong use cases for the
single bit requested
Chris Withers wrote:
I'm +1 on the branch having a version of 1.6.3~dev after 1.6.3 has
been released, and I like 2.0.0pre1 too :-)
I'm -1 on ~ meaning afterwards, because in Debian package versions it
means the exact opposite.
-Andrew
___
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 03:28:57PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
In this case, which I suspect is extremely rare anyway, you'll need to
have setuptools installed already.
So, in *any* of these cases, specifying setuptools as a requirement
seems like a total waste of time...
Now, what
Andrew Straw wrote:
Chris Withers wrote:
I'm +1 on the branch having a version of 1.6.3~dev after 1.6.3 has
been released, and I like 2.0.0pre1 too :-)
I'm -1 on ~ meaning afterwards, because in Debian package versions it
means the exact opposite.
I'm neutral on the exact spelling, I just
Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 3:32 PM, kiorky kio...@cryptelium.net wrote:
And also, to use them together, what a hell. For package A i need 0.6 (hard
requirement), for package B i need 0.7 (hard requirement), for C i need 0.6.
C
depend on A which depends on B. I also have
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 03:28:57PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
In this case, which I suspect is extremely rare anyway, you'll need to
have setuptools installed already.
So, in *any* of these cases, specifying setuptools as a requirement
seems like a total waste of
On Friday,2009-10-09, at 6:25 , Benji York wrote:
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn
zo...@zooko.com wrote:
What we do in the Tahoe-LAFS project is we don't count down to a
future
version, we only count up from a past version. This is also what
Twisted
does (no
Hi All,
bootstrap.py contains the following hard coded url:
exec urllib2.urlopen('http://peak.telecommunity.com/dist/ez_setup.py'
).read() in ez
With hindsight, this seems like a bad idea. For example, with the
ridiculous situation we currently have with setuptools and
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 04:03:52 -0700, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk
wrote:
Sridhar Ratnakumar wrote:
This release includes a new packaging tool by activestate called Python
Package Manager (PyPM).
Is PyPM available separately?
No, PyPM comes only with ActivePython (just like PPM
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Hi All,
bootstrap.py contains the following hard coded url:
exec urllib2.urlopen('http://peak.telecommunity.com/dist/ez_setup.py'
).read() in ez
With hindsight, this seems like a bad idea. For
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Hi All,
bootstrap.py contains the following hard coded url:
exec urllib2.urlopen('http://peak.telecommunity.com/dist/ez_setup.py'
).read() in ez
With hindsight, this seems like a bad idea.
I
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:54 AM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
kiorky wrote:
Hi Lennart,
If i read 'virtualenv-distribute 1.3.4.2 on pypi'
I can do some googling or even do some Pypi searching for
'virtualenv-distribute'.
Thus, the first link found may be [1].
On this
Ian Bicking a écrit :
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:54 AM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
kiorky wrote:
I think one (pjenvey) was an experiment, and another is actually a
released virtualenv-distribute package (updating the name in setup.py,
etc). And the third, I dunno.
The
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 04:04:06PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 03:28:57PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
In this case, which I suspect is extremely rare anyway, you'll need
to have setuptools installed already.
So, in *any* of these cases,
Ian Bicking wrote:
I think one (pjenvey) was an experiment, and another is actually a
released virtualenv-distribute package (updating the name in setup.py,
etc). And the third, I dunno.
Anyway -- I'm reluctant to switch virtualenv to distribute right now,
as I'm not confident it is ready for
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 04:04:06PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 03:28:57PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
In this case, which I suspect is extremely rare anyway, you'll need
to have setuptools installed already.
So, in *any*
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
My suggestion would be for bootstrap.py to include the code in ez_setup.py,
but that seems a little heavyweight. I guess this will all be solved when
the standard library includes modules to download packages from PyPI and
install them. But what to do in the meantime?
Jim Fulton wrote:
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Hi All,
bootstrap.py contains the following hard coded url:
exec urllib2.urlopen('http://peak.telecommunity.com/dist/ez_setup.py'
).read() in ez
With hindsight, this seems like
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 6:19 PM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
A specific bootstrap.py script for distribute is possible, and I
happen to have it finished now :
$ wget http://ziade.org/bootstrap.py
I'll certainly try this out, but I'm not using buildout trunk anywhere. Does
it
Stanley A. Klein skl...@cpcug.org wrote:
Windows and Mac are fundamentally single user systems that have added
capabilities for multiple users and are intended to be used with
proprietary software. Those considerations lead to minimal dependencies
among packages (each proprietary provider
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 01:24:50PM -, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On 12:25 pm, be...@zope.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn
zo...@zooko.com wrote:
What we do in the Tahoe-LAFS project is we don't count down to a
future
version, we only count up from a
[moved to disutils-sig]
Ian Bicking wrote:
Well, if multi-versioned installs were deprecated, it would not be
necessary to use Setuptools' style of script generation. Instead you
could simply dereference the entry point, calling the underlying
function directly in the script. This detail is
I'm crossposting to continue on distutils.
Ian Bicking a écrit :
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 3:54 AM, kiorky kio...@cryptelium.net wrote:
Well, if multi-versioned installs were deprecated, it would not be
necessary to use Setuptools' style of script generation. Instead you
could simply
Probably all these discussions are better on distutils-sig (just
copying python-dev to note the movement of the discussion)
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Michael Foord
fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
Outside of binaries on Windows, I'm still unsure if installing eggs
serves a useful
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 06:05:50PM +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
- The code is splitted in many packages and might be distributed under
several distributions.
- distribute.resources: that's
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 12:08 PM, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
distutils.entrypoints would seem to be the sensible place.
Why's that? On the whole, I don't think entry points are specific to
building bundling, which is what distutils is all about.
Entry points are about packages
2009-10-09 00:27:41 Tarek Ziadé napisał(a):
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 11:07:13PM +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar
Arahesis wrote:
2009-10-04 23:52:25 Sridhar Ratnakumar napisał(a):
On Sun, 04 Oct 2009 13:41:06
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 05:13:16PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 04:04:06PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 03:28:57PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
In this case, which I suspect is extremely rare anyway,
72 matches
Mail list logo
