It seems to me the much easier solution is to just always install coverage.py into a virtualenv, then we don't have to worry at all about operating-system politics.
Alex On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 6:05 AM, Thomas Goirand <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi there, > > It appears that in Debian, python-coverage provides the wrapper in > /usr/bin/python-coverage. I tried to push the current maintainer to > provide /usr/bin/coverage, but he doesn't agree. He believes that > "coverage" is just too generic to be squatted by the python-coverage > package. > > Robert Colins wrote that he sees it ok-ish if all of the OpenStack > projects makes it so that we could also use /usr/bin/python-coverage. > What is the view of others in the project? Could the path be checked, > and then used, so that it works in every cases? Of course, the goal > would be to avoid "by hand" patching in debian/patches whenever > possible, because this is a major pain. > > Your thoughts? > > Cheers, > > Thomas Goirand (zigo) > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -- "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire) "The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero GPG Key fingerprint: 125F 5C67 DFE9 4084
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
