I wanted to see how the Widget Browser, and finding it short, I wanted
to see if installed ToscaWidgets could be loaded in the same way. I can
obtain the list, but load() the widget modules, starting with
toscawidgets.widgets.forms fails setuptools Requirement.parse:
----
In [1]: import pkg_resources
In [2]: for widget_mod in
pkg_resources.iter_entry_points("toscawidgets.widgets"): print
widget_mod
...:
forms = toscawidgets.widgets.forms
jquery = toscawidgets.widgets.jquery
mochikit = toscawidgets.widgets.mochikit
tinymce = toscawidgets.widgets.tinymce
In [3]: for widget_mod in
pkg_resources.iter_entry_points("toscawidgets.widgets"):
widget_mod.load()
...:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
pkg_resources.VersionConflict Traceback (most
recent call last)
/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/setuptools-0.6c5-py2.4.egg/pkg_resources.py
in load(self, require, env, installer)
1827
1828 def load(self, require=True, env=None, installer=None):
-> 1829 if require: self.require(env, installer)
1830 entry = __import__(self.module_name,
globals(),globals(), ['__name__'])
1831 for attr in self.attrs:
/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/setuptools-0.6c5-py2.4.egg/pkg_resources.py
in require(self, env, installer)
1840 raise UnknownExtra("Can't require() without a
distribution", self)
1841 map(working_set.add,
-> 1842
working_set.resolve(self.dist.requires(self.extras),env,installer))
1843
1844
/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/setuptools-0.6c5-py2.4.egg/pkg_resources.py
in resolve(self, requirements, env, installer)
485 if dist not in req:
486 # Oops, the "best" so far conflicts with a
dependency
--> 487 raise VersionConflict(dist,req) # XXX put more
info here
488
requirements.extend(dist.requires(req.extras)[::-1])
489 processed[req] = True
VersionConflict: (ToscaWidgets 0.1a1dev-r2403
(/software/svn/ToscaWidgets), Requirement.parse('ToscaWidgets>=0.1a1'))
----
Is this a quirk of the dev-rN version unseparated suffix employed by
ToscaWidgets? It seems to a convention in common use, but I don't know
whether setuptools' version name conventions are expected evaluate this
name to 'greater than'. I don't think there would be any problem with
the released 0.1a1.
Thanks, I'll file a bug if this is something valid that should be fixed.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TurboGears" 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/turbogears?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
