On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Guilherme Polo <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Adriano Monteiro Marques
>>
>>>> Then there is the remaining issue about the umit executable file and
>>>> this new umit package. We could move all the code currently in this
>>>> umit file to a module named main inside this new umit package. The
>>>> unix installer could then create a umit executable (which could be
>>>> either a shellscript that executes "python /path/to/umit/main.py" or
>>>> something else that imports main.py and run main(sys.argv)) at the
>>>> appropriated place.
>>
>> My only concern here is that it could make the installation process a bit
>> harder to implement. Maybe, we could decide on a better substitutive name in
>> place of main.py or the umit module.
>>
>
> What about creating a scripts directory (or some better name maybe)
> and put umit and umit_scheduler.py there ?
>

Just remembered about bin/, that looks a better name to me.



-- 
-- Guilherme H. Polo Goncalves

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA
-OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise
-Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation
-Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD
http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H
_______________________________________________
Umit-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/umit-devel

Reply via email to