Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdr...@acm.org> added the comment: Antoine: I agree programmers shouldn't try to create situations like this.
Consider however an application assembled using a build tool like zc.buildout, which installs each package into a separate installation location (based on setuptools and easy_install). If the application uses several packages from the "foo" namespace (to keep with the original names from the report), there will be directories matching the first and third packages from the example. Now, further development on the application may cause a 3rd-party package named Foo to be used. This name is not the application programmer's to select, and the volume of code from the "foo" namespace may be too large to modify; it may represent 3rd party code (for example, the "zope" namespace package contains many widely used examples; if used at all, many are likely to be used). So I think the original use case stands, and may even be more important than ever given the widespread use of "namespace" packages. This also suggests that developers should check for the existence of packages of similar name before releasing code, in order to avoid this situation. (I'm disassociating msg20510, since roundup doesn't screw up the tree in the original report, so that message no longer adds anything useful.) _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue935117> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
