On Sep 15, 2009, at 7:52 PM, David Lyon wrote:
And imo the discussion has gone way off track..
The use case isn't abstract. All this discussion is about trying
to rewrite two lines of code.
-- setup.py --
"""
if sys.platform == 'win32':
setup.dependencies.add('win32com','162')
s
On Sep 15, 2009, at 8:42 PM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
What use cases do we have? There's the one described above, which
lots of people have been talking about. I think there's another one
related to target Python version - eg, on Python 2.3, depend on
simplejson, but on Python 2.
On Oct 3, 2009, at 1:00 PM, Ned Deily wrote:
This is not a good experience for users. Unless I'm missing something
(and I hope I am), this issue really can't be hand-waved away.
What would you suggest?
S
___
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-S
On Oct 3, 2009, at 4:08 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
2009/10/3 Ned Deily :
This is not a good experience for users. Unless I'm missing
something
(and I hope I am), this issue really can't be hand-waved away.
How about some sort of an announcement/warning on the setuptools site
itself?
I
On Oct 5, 2009, at 7:44 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
2009/10/5 Ronald Oussoren :
This is a problem, it means 2.6.3 is not a simple drop-in
replacement for 2.6.2 but requires the replacement of another
component as well. That can be a problem in organizations with
strict configuration manag
On Oct 5, 2009, at 9:38 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
I apologize for my part in this, but moving forward I think that if
it's possible to patch and release a setuptools that works with
Python 2.6.3 /and/ earlier Python 2.6.x's, then that should happen
asap. If that's not possible, then we mig
On Oct 7, 2009, at 3:18 AM, Florian Schulze wrote:
This way one - who stumbled upon the bitbucket site - does not have
to pull the source tree and look in docs/index.rst in order to get
the URL to the bug tracker. (I had a bug to report a couple of days).
The launchpad bugtracker is for v
On Oct 7, 2009, at 10:51 AM, Florian Schulze wrote:
On 07.10.2009, at 16:21, sstein...@gmail.com wrote:
On Oct 7, 2009, at 3:18 AM, Florian Schulze wrote:
This way one - who stumbled upon the bitbucket site - does not
have to pull the source tree and look in docs/index.rst in order
On Oct 12, 2009, at 4:25 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
But before you do that, be sure to uninstall Distribute completely
Damn if I understand this...such a long time waiting for all these bug
fixes...so little action, so much angst...
Then that all that effort going into the Distribute fork, so mu
On Oct 12, 2009, at 7:48 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 07:28 PM 10/12/2009 -0400, sstein...@gmail.com wrote:
we must "uninstall Distribute completely" get these fixes.
That's Distribute's doing, not mine. As I understand it, their
package includes a 'setuptools'
On Oct 13, 2009, at 3:15 AM, Reinout van Rees wrote:
On 2009-10-12, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 08:09 AM 10/12/2009 +, Reinout van Rees wrote:
OTOH, grumbl ... horrible breakage ... essential piece of
infrastructure ...
allowed to persist I'm pretty grumpy right now.
Relax, take a deep b
On Oct 13, 2009, at 3:32 AM, Jeff Rush wrote:
Too little, too late, no thanks, I'll just be sticking with
Distribute
from now on.
Several developers and an open development process vs a lone coder
with
a closed codebase? That's not really a choice at all...
Sorry, it doesn't look like anyo
that there are other people on the Distribute team who I'd
seriously consider as committers on setuptools or even as a chief
maintainer of the setuptools 0.6 line (if not more).
...asked me who those team members are
I'm asking. Who are they and, if you are willing to give them access,
h
On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:55 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
[a whole bunch of stuff...]
Understood and I've observed the public portions of all of this. Much
of it has not been pretty.
Personality conflicts aside, I wonder if it would be possible to move
some portion of the base of both setuptools and D
Warning: 3 part message.
It's all related so I decided to bundle it rather than starting
several new threads on the already over-burdened distutils list.
On Oct 15, 2009, at 5:06 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
Now, ssteinerX, what do you mean exactly by shared foundation ?
Well, at the moment, se
On Oct 16, 2009, at 4:24 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 3:39 AM, sstein...@gmail.com
wrote:
Some of the files (e.g. setuptools/archive_util.py) are only
different by a
bit of whitespace.
archive_util, in the mid term (2.7/3.2) will dissapear, in favor of
changes in
On Oct 16, 2009, at 11:41 AM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 10:46 AM 10/16/2009 -0400, sstein...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know that I'd call what I saw "designed." Complex, yes, but
design implies a plan and known direction, communicated by design
documents with tests that prove th
On Oct 16, 2009, at 12:25 PM, Brandon Craig Rhodes wrote:
Jannis Leidel writes:
That'd be very much appreciated, I'm sure the experience of the
distribute people would be helpful, too.
I'm not sure I quite approve of their approach, since it makes
installing Distribute under Python 3 take a
On Oct 16, 2009, at 12:59 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
I'm going to cross-post this to the distutils list as well. If the
idea is
to stabilize Distribute, get some tests in place, etc. then this
method of
distribution (running 2to3 in situ, as it were) is not the correct
way to
do it from
On Oct 16, 2009, at 2:09 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
sstein...@gmail.com wrote:
On Oct 16, 2009, at 12:59 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
I'm going to cross-post this to the distutils list as well. If the
idea is to stabilize Distribute, get some
On Oct 16, 2009, at 3:56 PM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
Buildbots seem to be in short supply though they should be easy
enough to come by in this day and age of penny-an-hour cloud
computing.
I think I'll see if maybe I can just whip up something about this...
Not sure if you're aw
I've just downloaded and configured the Distribute buildbot and it
appears that a dependency is missing somewhere. I get this (just the
errors excerpted).
Just wanted to capture this before I figure out what needs to be done...
test_make_tarball
(distutils.tests.test_archive_util.ArchiveU
On Oct 16, 2009, at 6:58 PM, Nathan Yergler wrote:
Looks like you're using a build of Python that wasn't compiled with
zlib support (--with-zlib, IIRC).
Right -- that's the python that the buildbot compiled from source,
that's why it's a bug ;-).
S
___
On Oct 16, 2009, at 7:04 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 12:58 AM, Nathan Yergler
wrote:
Looks like you're using a build of Python that wasn't compiled with
zlib support (--with-zlib, IIRC).
2009/10/16 sstein...@gmail.com :
I've just downloaded and configured
On Oct 16, 2009, at 7:21 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 1:13 AM, sstein...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Oct 16, 2009, at 7:04 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 12:58 AM, Nathan Yergler
wrote:
Looks like you're using a build of Python that wasn't compiled
On Oct 16, 2009, at 7:26 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 1:21 AM, Tarek Ziadé
wrote:
IOW the way python is built in the bbot, is now using your system's
zlib support...
Arggg... I am the typo master...
s/now/not.
So as Tres said maybe Ubuntu ships with a Python with zlib
On Oct 16, 2009, at 7:57 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 1:39 AM, sstein...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Oct 16, 2009, at 7:26 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 1:21 AM, Tarek Ziadé
wrote:
IOW the way python is built in the bbot, is now using your system's
On Oct 16, 2009, at 8:10 PM, Reinout van Rees wrote:
On 2009-10-16, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 10:46 AM 10/16/2009 -0400, sstein...@gmail.com wrote:
This is not designed by any objective standard I'd use.
You are correct; setuptools itself was not particularly
designed. Eggs are, entry p
Yes, I found those and installed -- not sure if the message went to
the list, too.
I'm waiting on how to get updated code from Tarek to re-run the whole
thing.
Thanks,
S
On Oct 16, 2009, at 10:36 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
sstein...@gmai
On Oct 17, 2009, at 4:34 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 4:58 AM, sstein...@gmail.com
wrote:
Yes, I found those and installed -- not sure if the message went to
the
list, too.
I'm waiting on how to get updated code from Tarek to re-run the
whole thing.
Hey,
My u
On Oct 17, 2009, at 4:54 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Tarek Ziadé
wrote:
It's a buildbot so once your buildout is created, (python
bootstrap.py
&& bin/buildout)
precisely:
python bootstrap.py && bin/buildout -c buildbot.cfg
sstei...@ubuntu:~/distutils-buil
On Oct 17, 2009, at 12:24 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 4:49 PM, sstein...@gmail.com
wrote:
precisely:
python bootstrap.py && bin/buildout -c buildbot.cfg
sstei...@ubuntu:~/distutils-builbot$ python bootstrap.py && bin/
buildout -c
buildbot.cfg
On Oct 17, 2009, at 12:24 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 4:49 PM, sstein...@gmail.com
wrote:
precisely:
python bootstrap.py && bin/buildout -c buildbot.cfg
sstei...@ubuntu:~/distutils-builbot$ python bootstrap.py && bin/
buildout -c
buildbot.cfg
On Oct 17, 2009, at 12:24 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
Just to be clear...I'm not just giving up when the build falls down, I
just do want to make sure to report everything I do so that we can get
the buildbot to configure whatever's not there automatically instead
of having to do anything manua
On Oct 17, 2009, at 3:47 PM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On 04:24 pm, ziade.ta...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 4:49 PM, sstein...@gmail.com
wrote:
precisely:
python bootstrap.py && bin/buildout -c buildbot.cfg
sstei...@ubuntu:~/distutils-builbot$ python boot
On Oct 18, 2009, at 11:26 AM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
So, is this something I have to install in addition to the way
Twisted's being installed now?
portmap? No, it's an extension module that's part of Twisted. Once
you have python-dev installed it should be okay.
Yah, I'm thin
On Oct 20, 2009, at 8:56 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
I'm sure I can't be the only person suffering from PEP overload when
it comes to packaging.
+1 on PEP overload
Any chance we could at least get dev/post markers in PEP386 and get
it done and out of the way?
+1 on getting the versioning nu
On Oct 20, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
(other than that 386 should be accepted and implemented asap...)
Its implemented, we just need a consensus
+1, ship it!
S
___
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.
On Oct 22, 2009, at 8:47 PM, Kaelin Colclasure wrote:
Greetings,
I am attempting my first Python contribution and have run into a
speed bump getting a working setup.py using setuptools.
Specifically, I cannot coax it to install my package data files into
the site-packages directory. Here
On Oct 24, 2009, at 5:43 AM, kiorky wrote:
Lennart Regebro a écrit :
2009/10/24 kiorky :
If tomorrow frameworks i use, rely on that for deployment, it
would be hard to
ignore it.
Yes. But hard to ignore does not equal forced. And especially in open
source, where you always have the abil
On Oct 27, 2009, at 4:53 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
Hello
We are going to release 0.6.7 this week. Among some new bugs fixes, we
want to provide a specific change that will
allow virtualenv to be released with an option to use Distribute
instead of Setuptools, like zc.buildout.
$ virtualenv --dis
On Oct 27, 2009, at 10:21 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
Maybe something like a TEST_README documenting the tests that prove
the that
the closed ticket's bugs have a test that proves that the former bad
behaviour was fixed.
Maybe a simpler way would be to use Bitbucket issue tracker features ?
Ar
On Nov 2, 2009, at 5:40 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
If the subject can be changed with the word "setuptools" in it, I'll
accomodate with it.
Did you ask for that specifically because I said it would be difficult
to provide?
Uh, personal animosities aside, Tarek didn't ask for that, Chris did.
On Nov 7, 2009, at 3:20 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
Guido van Rossum writes:
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 2:52 PM, David Lyon
wrote:
I think buildbot-style test runs for PyPI packages would raise average
package quality on PyPI.
Please excuse the cross-post but I wanted to make sure that all these
On Nov 7, 2009, at 10:08 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 9:30 AM, sstein...@gmail.com > wrote:
On Nov 7, 2009, at 3:20 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
Guido van Rossum writes:
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 2:52 PM, David Lyon >
wrote:
I think buildbot-style test runs for PyPI pa
On Nov 7, 2009, at 7:10 PM, Kevin Teague wrote:
Being able to update individual modules within the standard library
would absolutely rock my world and would have removed the urgency from
2.6.3/4 updates.
Just update what's necessary. What a concept.
Yes, please. The sooner the better.
On Nov 11, 2009, at 4:39 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
If nobody is willing to write the code, the code is not needed.
I think it would be more accurate to say that nobody is deciding that
the "need" is sufficient to invest the resources to fill it.
There are lots of things that many people w
On Nov 11, 2009, at 7:38 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
2009/11/11 sstein...@gmail.com :
On Nov 11, 2009, at 4:39 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
If nobody is willing to write the code, the code is not needed.
I think it would be more accurate to say that nobody is deciding
that the
"nee
On Nov 16, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Ram Rachum wrote:
I'm trying to make a tar.gz source distribution. I saw in the docs
that a tar
program is needed. I am on Windows. Where do I get one?
You've got to be joking.
Try Google.
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=windows+tar+progra
On Nov 24, 2009, at 4:47 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> Hello,
>
> PEP 386 seem to be ready, and I would like to push if for feedback at
> python-dev, just before PEP 345 is pushed.
>
> My only concern is now to make sure the PEP motivations and explanations are
> crystal clear.
>
> Anyone see any p
On Nov 24, 2009, at 3:40 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>> 2> The explanation for "suggest_rational_version" is stubbed out in the
>> README.txt file:
>>
>>XXX explain here suggest_rational_version
>>
>>it should be documented what we expect it to do and that leads into...
On Nov 25, 2009, at 12:44 PM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>> Could we extend the pseudo-format of the versions a little to also
>> include variants which use more than just one character and also
>> allow hyphens and spaces to be used for additional clarity ?
>>
>> VERSION_RE = r
On Nov 27, 2009, at 7:31 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> [..]
>>> don't worry about Debian, we'll simply replace "-" with "~" (we use "~"
>>> and "+" right now[0]). I'm not sure about rpm, but I bet it has
>>> something similar and it will be much e
On Nov 27, 2009, at 9:41 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>> I'm still very interested in the increment_version functionality we talked
>> about earlier so that we could have our build process automatically up our
>> release version numbers so we have a standard way of maintaining incremental
>> versioni
On Nov 27, 2009, at 9:58 AM, Piotr Ozarowski wrote:
> [sstein...@gmail.com, 2009-11-27]
>>> That makes me think that a nice add-on to the lib and the PEP would be
>>> to provide APIs to translate a Python PEP 386 version to a Debian/Ubuntu or
>>> RPM ones -
>
On Nov 28, 2009, at 4:50 AM, Laura Creighton wrote:
>> At some point, we all agree that MAJOR.MINOR.MICRO is an accepted
>> standard and we are arguing about pre/post/dev releases.
>
> We have no way to enforce this on the world. The arguments here may
> have gone away, but out in the wild, I th
On Nov 30, 2009, at 2:39 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> maintainer that has been AWOL for most of the time in the past 2 years)
AWOL is an acronym for "absent without leave" or "absent without official
leave".
Yes, it sucked that setuptools got abandoned but nobody had to give him leave.
S
___
On Dec 12, 2009, at 11:26 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> There are hundreds of way to break things :)
>
> IOW everytime a change is made, there's a potential risk. Functional
> tests may help
Tarek,
What are you using for a test suite pre-release now?
I started on the multi-package
On Dec 12, 2009, at 12:34 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 6:29 PM, sstein...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>>
>> On Dec 12, 2009, at 11:26 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>>
>>> There are hundreds of way to break things :)
>>>
>>> IOW e
On Dec 12, 2009, at 12:34 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> That would be a good timing to continue then ;)
The work I did is in the distutils-buildbot branch "smoke_with_mirrors".
Basically, what I did was set up a configuration file that contained the
packages we were going to install, what versions
On Dec 14, 2009, at 9:05 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I see a few tests for buildout recipes that use zc.buildout.testing but also
> use a RENormalizer to hide "Couldn't find index page for" errors..
>
> Why is this error showing up and why is it okay to hide it?
>
> not-joining-the
Tarek,
We recently talked about incorporating the testing scheme I started in
distutils-buildbot directly into the release path for Distutils to avoid issues
like the ones with the most recent release.
I am putting this out on the list for comments; I'm NOT interested in
bikesh
On Dec 20, 2009, at 6:54 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 6:33 PM, sstein...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> [..]
>>
>>While this approach will be fine when we move it to building
>> on-demand buildbots, it is much too time consuming both in develop
On Dec 23, 2009, at 9:59 PM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
> What's with the interest in having packages hosted on PyPI?
>
> I'm not specifically opposed to this, but I don't see any reason it would
> benefit anyone either. It'd be awesome if someone could explain this.
> Perhaps if the an
On Dec 24, 2009, at 2:02 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 06:06, sstein...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>> Right now, installing e.g. Twisted, requires finding the website, figuring
>> out which exact file to download, then figuring out exactly how to get it
>&
On Dec 24, 2009, at 9:06 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> I'm really concerned that what you just seemed to suggest was that the
>> much-maligned-and-soon-to-be-deprecated `easy_install` is the
>> `super-duper-python-thing-just-like-cpan-only-better` of today?
>
> That's a strange concern.
I don
On Dec 24, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 15:46, sstein...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>> I don't think it's strange to be concerned that one of the SDPTJLCOB
>> options, and the one that you used as your example, is going to go away.
On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:50 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> easy_install is a command, basically a wrapper around setuptools
> install functionality. I doubt many scripts would use it in any more
> complex way than calling it, in which case moving to pip is a matter
> of replacing the command.
Yes, I'm
On Dec 26, 2009, at 7:15 AM, Laura Creighton wrote:
> Right now I don't know any way to say 'under no circumstances,
> ever, let easy_install near my code because it will do very bad things
> to it'.
Uh...I think you just did.
> I liked things a whole lot better when pypi was about being a pac
On Dec 26, 2009, at 4:17 PM, Stephen Waterbury wrote:
> sstein...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I think that splitting > package storage and pointers to
>> off-repository storage (for those who don't upload to PyPI)
>> > metadata about the stored packages
>
On Dec 27, 2009, at 3:27 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 18:40, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> 3. Making it easier to mirror/replicate all metadata.
>
> I've now written a script that does this via XML-RPC. It's dead easy,
> actually. It's however also slow, and looks like it ta
On Dec 27, 2009, at 5:47 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 18:40, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> 1. Ask those who do not upload why they don't upload, and see if we can fix
>> it.
>> 2. Ask those who do not want to upload why they don't provide a download URL.
>
> Out of a total o
On Dec 27, 2009, at 11:27 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 16:54, sstein...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>> I'll update the PyPI checker in the distutilsversion test_pypi_versions.py
>> to provide that information as well. I think I'll make a separate p
On Dec 27, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> The tarred download would be really handy for this utility as, if
>> there's no .pkl of the data, or the user requests it, I pull fresh
>> copy.
>
> How difficult would it be for you to provide such data, for anybody
> interested in using t
On Dec 27, 2009, at 2:10 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 17:50, sstein...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>> The tarred download would be really handy for this utility as, if there's no
>> .pkl of the data, or the user requests it, I pull fresh copy.
>
>
On Dec 27, 2009, at 2:34 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote in Re: [Distutils] How
Python can have CPAN.:
> I attached the file I used for the mirroring.
Cool. I'll just integrate it with the current version of the PyPI version
extractor from the distutilsversion project and upload it to PyPI as a new
On Dec 27, 2009, at 4:49 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> I'll make sure to put up a usable client class that pulls from the
>> stored version and updates it, with appropriate caching similar to
>> what you did in your code (and the way that I did it in my version as
>> well).
>
> Please make sure
On Dec 27, 2009, at 6:42 PM, david.l...@preisshare.net wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 17:50, sstein...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>> The tarred download would be really handy for this utility as, if
>>> there's no .pkl of the data, or the user requests it, I
On Dec 30, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Sebastien Douche wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 11:47, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>
>> Out of a total of 8522 packages on PyPI, there are 203 packages (2.4%)
>> whose latest release does not provide either a package on PyPI, nor a
>> download url. Of these 16 does not
On Dec 30, 2009, at 1:59 PM, Sebastien Douche wrote:
> Hi folks :)
> I want to know the strategy to be followed in a DVCS extension. A
> small improvement I want to code is unique area for the version (and
> not version.cfg *and* setup.py)
>
> What do you think? Any ideas welcome
Sorry, I'm not
On Jan 11, 2010, at 8:01 PM, David Lyon wrote:
> When I run the same thing:
>
>> import platform
>> platform.machine()
>> 'x86'
Just as a data point, I get:
import platform
platform.machine()
'i386'
on a dual processor quad core Mac Pro.
S
___
Distu
On Jan 29, 2010, at 7:32 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> "P.J. Eby" writes:
>
>> At 04:05 PM 1/29/2010 -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>> The important thing is to have exactly one place to set the package's
>>> version number.
>>
>> Put it in setup.py, then. If you absolutely must have a __version__
>>
82 matches
Mail list logo
