Re: Best way to package a python module which is "private" with exposed calling script

2017-02-06 Thread Paul Wise
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 7:32 AM, Simon McVittie wrote: > This is not portable to platforms that don't have symlinks (hello Windows) FYI, Windows has symlinks: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa363878(v=vs.85).aspx https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_symbolic_link -- bye,

Re: Best way to package a python module which is "private" with exposed calling script

2017-02-06 Thread Simon McVittie
On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 at 16:43:32 -0500, Thomas Nyberg wrote: > What I would ideally like is for the module > code to be put somewhere off the regular system path and then have the > binary "know" how to find it. If you do this: /usr/ ├── bin/ │ └── script → ../share/mypackage/scri

Best way to package a python module which is "private" with exposed calling script

2017-02-06 Thread Thomas Nyberg
Hello, What I would like to do is to package a private python package without exposing it's internals. Here is the setup: * module - This is a module that contains the main code * script - This is a python script which handles some argument parsing stuff and then imports the module code to do

Re: Moving off of git-dpm (Re: git-dpm breakage src:faker)

2017-02-06 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Feb 05, 2017, at 02:07 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote: >Experimentation with a few packages to prepare for a migration and make sure >the documentation is good, is fine. We really ought to switch for real all >at once like we did for svn -> git. It's not much of a team repository >without a consis

Re: Moving off of git-dpm (Re: git-dpm breakage src:faker)

2017-02-06 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Feb 05, 2017, at 04:01 PM, Brian May wrote: >What should we call the clone page? > >PqGitPackaging??? GitPackagingPq ? Cheers, -Barry