On 3/7/07, jlnn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We were hoping to avoid that, because we have multiple development/ > test and production servers that need to be configured exactly the > same. Standard configs is the best way to ensure that. >
It's an academic debate or matter of personal taste, I suppose, but I'd argue that building it yourself is the way to ensure the same config rather than using the system python which gets lots of other things (potentially) thrown into it. Regardless, at Creative Commons we use tools like zc.buildout to make dependency management trivial (or at least sane). FWIW. NRY > On Mar 7, 10:37 am, "Nathan R. Yergler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm not sure I fully understand the question, but why not just build > > Python from source in something like /usr/local/python244? > > > > Nathan > > > > On 3/7/07, jlnn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > We're trying to set up a framework for our developers. We're using a > > > standard install of RHEL ES4. If we modify the configuration to use > > > Python 2.4 the admin tools break and RedHat won't support the > > > installation. We've tried using Python 2.3, but a recent bug, > > > according to our development manager, makes that problematic. We use > > > the Apache/mod_python installation for the framework. Has anyone > > > gotten this to work and how is it accomplished without modifying the > > > OS? > > > Thanks ahead of time. > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
