Re: [Sugar-devel] [Dextrose] [PATCH sugar-toolkit] Insert activity root path in front of the reset of sys.path

2011-02-07 Thread Sascha Silbe
Excerpts from Aleksey Lim's message of Sun Feb 06 01:50:54 +0100 2011: [Posting only on sugar-devel - please let's discuss general Sugar development just there, not on dextrose] Otherwise it is possible to include, eg, system modules before local ones. Which is how Python 2 usually works. Your

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Dextrose] [PATCH sugar-toolkit] Insert activity root path in front of the reset of sys.path

2011-02-07 Thread Martin Langhoff
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 4:40 AM, Sascha Silbe sascha-ml-reply-to-201...@silbe.org wrote: Otherwise it is possible to include, eg, system modules before local ones. Which is how Python 2 usually works. Your patch would make us deviate from upstream, making it harder to debug. I've done

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Dextrose] [PATCH sugar-toolkit] Insert activity root path in front of the reset of sys.path

2011-02-06 Thread Bernie Innocenti
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 00:50 +, Aleksey Lim wrote: Otherwise it is possible to include, eg, system modules before local ones. Seems like a good idea. Reviewed-by: Bernie Innocenti ber...@codewiz.org -- // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/ \X/ Sugar Labs -

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Dextrose] [PATCH sugar-toolkit] Insert activity root path in front of the reset of sys.path

2011-02-06 Thread Samuel Greenfeld
Not that would cause much of a slowdown, or that this would handle the (hopefully unlikely) case where Python gains modules named identically to Activity ones, but: What are we trying to solve here? Are activities bundling third-party Python libraries which have to be preferred in most

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Dextrose] [PATCH sugar-toolkit] Insert activity root path in front of the reset of sys.path

2011-02-06 Thread Bernie Innocenti
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 19:22 -0500, Samuel Greenfeld wrote: What are we trying to solve here? Are activities bundling third-party Python libraries which have to be preferred in most cases over system-provided ones (if present)? So, my expectations is that if an activity developer chooses to

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Dextrose] [PATCH sugar-toolkit] Insert activity root path in front of the reset of sys.path

2011-02-06 Thread Aleksey Lim
On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 07:22:12PM -0500, Samuel Greenfeld wrote: Not that would cause much of a slowdown, or that this would handle the (hopefully unlikely) case where Python gains modules named identically to Activity ones, but: What are we trying to solve here? Are activities

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Dextrose] [PATCH sugar-toolkit] Insert activity root path in front of the reset of sys.path

2011-02-06 Thread Martin Langhoff
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 9:39 PM, Aleksey Lim alsr...@activitycentral.org wrote: On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 07:22:12PM -0500, Samuel Greenfeld wrote: Not that would cause much of a slowdown, or that this would handle the (hopefully unlikely) case where Python gains modules named identically to

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Dextrose] [PATCH sugar-toolkit] Insert activity root path in front of the reset of sys.path

2011-02-06 Thread Benjamin M. Schwartz
On 02/06/2011 09:39 PM, Aleksey Lim wrote: In my mind, the situation when modules that come with activity have higher priority than system ones is more natural/predictable. I attempted to do the reverse with Watch Me. Watch Me includes binary python modules that are not installed by default in

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Dextrose] [PATCH sugar-toolkit] Insert activity root path in front of the reset of sys.path

2011-02-06 Thread Aleksey Lim
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 12:13:24AM -0500, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote: On 02/06/2011 09:39 PM, Aleksey Lim wrote: In my mind, the situation when modules that come with activity have higher priority than system ones is more natural/predictable. I attempted to do the reverse with Watch Me.