OK, I don't agree with everything, but I think all of those are valid benefits of a disutils based installation.
The drawbacks I see are that it will require more setup on the users part. They'll have to create a config directory, cache directories, servlet directories, etc. We can automate that with a script that can be run by them. We'll also need to install the main AppServer startup script somewhere in the standard PATH so that there is something they can execute without having to type the whole path to the Webware package. Any other drawbacks from anyone else? Jay > -----Original Message----- > From: Tavis Rudd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 8:10 PM > To: Love, Jay; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Webware-discuss] Re: [Webware-devel] What's needed for > Webwa re 1.0? > > > Damn, I can't find that old email. I thought I had a fairly > compelling argument;) Here's what I see as the key practical > advantages: > > * it allows you to quickly create distribution packages in a variety > of different formats: binary-tarball, src-tarball, rpm, deb, windows > installer, etc. > > * it provides a robust and widely tested API for installing various > components. > > * it encourages us to not use the src-tarball as the installed app > files, thus allowing us to do various things to the files as they are > installed. > > * installing to PYTHONHOME/site-packages allows you to have multiple > webkit processes running from a single set of the core modules > > * it encourages us to think of the core modules as being libraries > rather than just part of an installed application. Thus, all working > files for a particular webkit application are physically separated > from the core modules. This is a VERY GOOD THING (tm). This also > allows the core modules to be used as part of other frameworks. > > Webware is not an application, it is a framework for building > applications. > > * distutils are the accepted Pythonic way to do installs. > > Tavis > > On Tuesday 02 April 2002 15:22, Jay wrote: > > I don't see the point of Disutils for Webware. Webware is not a > > library, at least not really. It's an application. There are > > parts of it that can be used as a library, but that hasn't been the > > focus for a long time. On Linux, I don't think that Webware should > > live under > > /usr/lib/python2.1/site-packages/Webware. I think it should live > > under /usr/local/ somewhere. Actually, I put in /opt, but anyway. > > > > I'm not anti-disutils, I'm just not clear on the usefulness for > > Webware. My understanding is that disutils is intended for > > installing libraries, compiling them if necessary, etc. Red Hat's > > installer is not installed as a module. > > > > The only use I see is to install stuff like MiscUtils, etc., as > > python modules. But then that spreads everything everywhere, etc. > > > > Tavis, I know you have a strong opposite opinion here. Tell me > > what I'm missing. (I know you've told me before, but I forgot.) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you received this message in error or are not the intended recipient, you should destroy the e-mail message and any attachments or copies, and you are prohibited from retaining, distributing, disclosing or using any information contained herein. Please inform us of the erroneous delivery by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Webware-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss
