Ian Bicking wrote:
Martin Aspeli wrote:
whit wrote:

actually, in my current workplace, workingenv is the standard way to set up one's dev environment. but in the context of the previous statement, familar is perhaps a better word.

I'm still not clear how widely used workingenv is? Is it "officially endorsed" anywhere else?

It steps more lightly than buildout does.

What does that mean?

It's also mostly equivalent in mechanism to virtual-python, which is used quite widely. Both use setuptools conventions more closely than buildout does. It would be nice if I could say "then you get access to all the setuptools-related management tools", except there are almost none :( But if they *did* exist you'd get access to them ;)

I suggest that workingenv and buildout are both such tools.

Build stuff seems surprisingly contentious. The debate around setuptools itself has always been far more difficult than it should be; there's a lot of stop energy. So the Python community as a whole is moving very slowly on this stuff.

I suggest that, other than contention, this is somewhat healthy.
People with different goals will often need different tools and
make different tradeoffs.


Jim Fulton           mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]       Python Powered!
CTO                  (540) 361-1714            http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation     http://www.zope.com       http://www.zope.org
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to