On Sep 9, 7:45 pm, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ago wrote: > > The only thing I would add is that in my experience I often use > > different working-envs for different projects, so I'd prefer to have a > > more generic solution as opposed to a single working-env per user. The > > latter could still be achieved by setting the appropriate environment > > variable in the user profile. Do you think it would be possible to > > accommodate for the above in your PEP? > > Isn't PYTHONUSERBASE sufficient for your needs? The env var alters the > base directory. > > I can neither change the PEP nor the implementation at this stage of the > development cycle. Python 2.6 and 3.0 are in beta and the API is set in > stone. > > Christian
I had missed that, yes I think that PYTHONUSERBASE will do fine! It might be useful though to be able to skip other system site dirs altogether so that only local site packages are used, as in the second patch I sent (see PYTHONNOSYSSITES). Thanks a lot, Ago -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
