On 13/08/2010 10:02 PM, Michael Foord wrote:
On 13/08/2010 06:39, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Michael Foord writes:
> How is ~/python not memorable or consistent? (And cross-platform
> memorability and consistency is valuable too.)
But what does "~" mean on Windows?
There is a "user
On 13/08/2010 06:39, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Michael Foord writes:
> How is ~/python not memorable or consistent? (And cross-platform
> memorability and consistency is valuable too.)
But what does "~" mean on Windows?
There is a "user directory" in Windows directly analagous to ~, and
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 3:21 PM, John Arbash Meinel
wrote:
> I don't know what the specific issue is here, but adding entries to
> sys.path makes startup time *significantly* slower.
>
> I happen to use easy_install since Windows doesn't have its own package
> manager. Unfortunately the default of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
...
> * that said, Windows seems much slower than Linux on equivalent
>hardware, perhaps attempting to open files is intrinsically more
>expensive there? Certainly it's not safe to assume conclusions drawn
>on Linux will apply equally we
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 11:57:57 -0400
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Aug 12, 2010, at 09:10 AM, Fred Drake wrote:
>
> >Perhaps user configuration belongs in ~/.local/, or ~/.local/python/
> >(with attendant Windows & Mac OS noises); I don't really care where it
> >lands, because right now we just have a
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I've missed most of this discussion while on vacation, but if ~/.local is
> supposed to mirror /usr/local, then wouldn't a logical place for per-user
> configuration files be ~/.local/etc/whatever.cfg?
Maybe it is; I'd hope so.
The fd.o spe
On Aug 12, 2010, at 09:10 AM, Fred Drake wrote:
>Perhaps user configuration belongs in ~/.local/, or ~/.local/python/
>(with attendant Windows & Mac OS noises); I don't really care where it
>lands, because right now we just have a mess. Getting it "right" with
>respect to Window's "roaming" notio
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:48 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> 2010/8/12 Éric Araujo :
>>> Choosing an arbitrary location we think is good on every system is fine
>>> and non risky I think, as long as Python let the various distribution
>>> change those paths though configuration.
>>
>> Don’t you have a
Michael Foord writes:
> How is ~/python not memorable or consistent? (And cross-platform
> memorability and consistency is valuable too.)
But what does "~" mean on Windows? Inside of Python you can have a
consistent definition, but that doesn't help people whose installer
gets mixed signals so
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 7:29 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 18:14:44 -0400
> Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 12, 2010, at 6:30 AM, Tim Golden wrote:
>>
>> > I don't care how many stats we're doing
>>
>> You might not, but I certainly do. And I can guarantee you that the
>> a
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 03:15:28AM +0200, Éric Araujo wrote:
> > A good alternative would be to make the config file overridable. That way
> > you can have sysconfig.cfg next to sysconfig.py or in a known config
> > directory relative to the python stdlib install but also let the
> > distributions
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 18:14:44 -0400
> Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 12, 2010, at 6:30 AM, Tim Golden wrote:
> >
> > > I don't care how many stats we're doing
> >
> > You might not, but I certainly do. And I can guarantee you that the
> > authors of command-line t
> A good alternative would be to make the config file overridable. That way
> you can have sysconfig.cfg next to sysconfig.py or in a known config
> directory relative to the python stdlib install but also let the
> distributions and individual sites override the defaults by making changes
> to /e
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 07:48:22AM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> 2010/8/12 Éric Araujo :
> >> Choosing an arbitrary location we think is good on every system is fine
> >> and non risky I think, as long as Python let the various distribution
> >> change those paths though configuration.
> >
> > Don’t
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 08:18:27 pm Steve Holden wrote:
> One might make a case that all configuration data should be stored in
> a single SQLite database (with a suitable API to hide the relational
> nature of the store).
-1
Please don't even *consider* such a thing. Haven't we learned from
Firefox
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 18:14:44 -0400
Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
>
> On Aug 12, 2010, at 6:30 AM, Tim Golden wrote:
>
> > I don't care how many stats we're doing
>
> You might not, but I certainly do. And I can guarantee you that the
> authors of command-line tools that have to start up in under ten
On Aug 12, 2010, at 6:30 AM, Tim Golden wrote:
> I don't care how many stats we're doing
You might not, but I certainly do. And I can guarantee you that the authors of
command-line tools that have to start up in under ten seconds, for example
'bzr', care too.
2010/8/12 Éric Araujo :
>> Choosing an arbitrary location we think is good on every system is fine
>> and non risky I think, as long as Python let the various distribution
>> change those paths though configuration.
>
> Don’t you have a bootstrapping problem? How do you know where to look at
> the
On 12/08/2010 08:26, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
[snip...]
Choosing an arbitrary location we think is good on every system is fine
and non risky I think, as long as Python let the various distribution
change those paths though configuration.
In fact, that's one of the future goal of the sysconfig module
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 6:18 AM, Steve Holden wrote:
> Didn't we have this discussion when per-user libraries came up?
> Shouldn't we be using a subdirectory of that location? We ruin the risk
> of Python becoming distributed so finely it becomes impossible to change
> things, what with per-user l
> Ultimately, I don't feel very strongly about this subject. I'm more
> concerned that the chosen location (file or registry or whatever) be
> documented -- and documented from a Windows perspective as well, so
> you don't have to guess what "HOME" means in this context.
Rest assured that I don’t
On 12 August 2010 12:59, Tim Golden wrote:
> re: using the Registry: To be honest, I was answering the literal
> question posed by Eric: where to put config files? Not the wider
> question: how should config data be stored? Where the answer to
> the latter question might be: the Registry -- much a
Le 12/08/2010 12:18, Steve Holden a écrit :
> Didn't we have this discussion when per-user libraries came up?
> Shouldn't we be using a subdirectory of that location?
As pointed out by Antoine, Georg, Michael and I, the PEP 370 directory
for user site-packages is not the right place to put config
>> If the files are shared among all users then /usr/local/
>> seems more reasonable.
Oh, right, I forgot to think about system-wide config files. They have
to be supported by another function in site.
A lot of programs have similar-looking code to get a list of filenames
and then process it with
On 12/08/2010 12:17, Michael Foord wrote:
How is ~/python not memorable or consistent? (And cross-platform
memorability and consistency is valuable too.)
I was thinking outside Python rather than inside it (where ~ has no
meaning on Windows) but you make a good point here. If we were just
disc
On 12/08/2010 11:54, Tim Golden wrote:
On 12/08/2010 11:40, Michael Foord wrote:
User editable configuration files are very different from libraries. The
per user site-packages folder *should* be hidden somewhere out of the
way where you can get at them if you want them but won't stumble across
On 12/08/2010 11:40, Michael Foord wrote:
User editable configuration files are very different from libraries. The
per user site-packages folder *should* be hidden somewhere out of the
way where you can get at them if you want them but won't stumble across
them all the time. e.g. AppData on Windo
On 12/08/2010 11:18, Steve Holden wrote:
On 8/12/2010 5:50 AM, Tim Golden wrote:
On 11/08/2010 16:22, Éric Araujo wrote:
It would be nice to define one standard location for config files used
by stdlib modules, and maybe also by third-party programs related
closely to Python developme
On 12/08/2010 10:50, Tim Golden wrote:
Unfortunately, the canonical place is not always the place most
used. Especially since the convention under *nix is to place dotfile
or dotdirs under $HOME. Windows doesn't, by default, have a $HOME so
various locations are considered $HOME, including (but n
On 12/08/2010 11:18, Steve Holden wrote:
On 8/12/2010 5:50 AM, Tim Golden wrote:
[... snip explanation of standard & non-standard locations ...]
Didn't we have this discussion when per-user libraries came up?
Shouldn't we be using a subdirectory of that location?
Yes we should. My explanati
On 8/12/2010 5:50 AM, Tim Golden wrote:
> On 11/08/2010 16:22, Éric Araujo wrote:
>> It would be nice to define one standard location for config files used
>> by stdlib modules, and maybe also by third-party programs related
>> closely to Python development (testing tools, static code checkers and
On 11/08/2010 16:22, Éric Araujo wrote:
It would be nice to define one standard location for config files used
by stdlib modules, and maybe also by third-party programs related
closely to Python development (testing tools, static code checkers and
the like), in a way that doesn’t clutter the user
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 7:00 AM, Russell E. Owen wrote:
...
>
> If the files are shared among all users then /usr/local/
> seems more reasonable.
>
> I also think whatever you choose for linux is also the best choice for
> Mac OS X (my preferred platform). While there are other possible
> director
In article <4c62c01d.6000...@netwok.org>,
Ãric Araujo wrote:
> Hello list
>
> Tarek opened a distutils bugs in http://bugs.python.org/issue7175 that
> evolved into a discussion about the proper location to use for config files.
>
> Distutils uses [.]pydistutils.cfg and .pypirc, and now unitte
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:
> Considering the FHS or the XDG Base
> Directory specifications, there is a precedent in distinguishing user
> config (edited by the user through a text editor or settings graphical
> window), program data (state) and cache (files for speedups
> PEP 370 already specifies a directory for Python config files:
>
>> user data directory
>>
>> Usually the parent directory of the user site directory.
>> It's meant for Python version specific data like config
>> files, docs, images and translations.
Thanks for pointing that. Howeve
> I'd like to see a more complete proposal, including:
Fair enough.
tl;dr: Locating config files is hard.
I have looked at http://github.com/ActiveState/appdirs (MIT) for
OS-specific bits of knowledge. (Note that the directories it uses for
free OSes are not compliant with the freedesktop.org Bas
Hello,
Fred Drake fdrake at acm.org wrote:
> +0.5
>
> I'd like to see a more complete proposal, including:
>
> - what to do with Windows, Mac OS X
PEP 370 already specifies a directory for Python config files:
> user data directory
>
> Usually the parent directory of the user site directory.
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Éric Araujo wrote:
> Tarek, Antoine, RDM, MAL were +1 on using ~/.python (whether to use
> .pythonx.y or .python/x.y is a subissue to discuss after general agreement).
+0.5
I'd like to see a more complete proposal, including:
- what to do with Windows, Mac OS X
On 11/08/2010 16:22, Éric Araujo wrote:
Hello list
Tarek opened a distutils bugs in http://bugs.python.org/issue7175 that
evolved into a discussion about the proper location to use for config files.
Distutils uses [.]pydistutils.cfg and .pypirc, and now unittest2 has a
config file too.
ID
Hello list
Tarek opened a distutils bugs in http://bugs.python.org/issue7175 that
evolved into a discussion about the proper location to use for config files.
Distutils uses [.]pydistutils.cfg and .pypirc, and now unittest2 has a
config file too.
It would be nice to define one standard location
41 matches
Mail list logo
