On 11/25/05, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 10:28 AM 11/25/2005 -0500, Phillip J. Eby wrote: > >Actually, I'm increasingly tempted to PEP the idea of a > >name-version.pkg-info file being installed alongside the code as a standard > >Python distutils feature. This discussion has made it clearer (even to > >me!) how useful such a thing would be, and if it became a standard part of > >the distutils, it would simply become part of Debian and every other system > >packager unless explicitly removed. > > Also, it just occurred to me that this would ultimately fix one of Paul > Moore's complaints about eggs as well. If bdist_wininst included this > .pkg-info, then even Windows "managed" packages would be supported in this > scheme,
That would be a major bonus for me, certainly. > and setuptools could include a bdist_wininst that made similar > .exe's to wrap eggs. That would be the other half of the equation. I had avoided suggesting precisely that, because it's daft of me to expect you to do this work just to stop me moaning (and installer-writing is enough of a black art to me that I can't assume it's an easy change to the existing bdist_wininst code). > (Of course, the full solution for Paul's issue wouldn't arrive until Python > 2.5 in that case, unless the people doing the .exe packaging are using some > special tool to add the .pkg-info to non-setuptools .exe's.) No problem for me, 2.5 would be a sensible timescale. Paul.
