On Jun 9, 8:38 am, Gael Varoquaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 01, 2008 at 06:20:44AM -0700, Vinzent Steinberg wrote:
> > IMHO it's awesome. Let's switch to this way of distribution of sympy
> > and its third party modules. (Additionally there could be of course a
> > tar ball with all dependencies included.) What do you think?
>
> Eggs work by monkey patching sys.patch, which has some "interesting"
> consequences. IMHO thisis not acceptable. It has been pointed out that
> these consequences can be avoided by patching setuptools. This patch is
> not happening, and setuptools development process is not transparent. I
> consider setuptools as a neat toy, but not mature and useable for
> production. Not everybody agrees with me :).
>
> Gaël
I don't know much about setuptools as I did not try it yet. My
judgement was completely superficial. :)
Thank you for sharing your experiences, this is exactly what I wanted
to know.
Could you be please more concrete and tell what "interesting"
consequences are to be expected?
Do you think distutils is better than setuptools? I want it to work
like every good Windows installer. It should remove old files and not
break installations.
Guido for example apparently does not agree with you. :) (http://
mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-April/063964.html)
Vinzent
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sympy" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
