-->"Phillip" == Phillip J Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
(btw Phillip, thanks muchly for your patience with this thread)
Phillip> If you unpack this as-is, but rename EGG-INFO to
Phillip> foobar.egg-info (today) or foobar-1.2.egg-info (when I
Phillip> release 0.6a9 of setuptools), and the
-->"Phillip" == Phillip J Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Phillip> Python developers would *love* to have Debian manage their
Phillip> packages, they would simply like to be able to verify at
Phillip> runtime that the management has in fact been done. It's not
Phillip> that we don't trust
-->"Phillip" == Phillip J Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Phillip> Python developers would *love* to have Debian manage their
Phillip> packages, they would simply like to be able to verify at
Phillip> runtime that the management has in fact been done. It's not
Phillip> that we don't trust
-->"Phillip" == Phillip J Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Phillip> I've only been getting the barest hint of what "crappy
Phillip> packaging" consists of, except for the loud-and-clear message
Phillip> that it's defined as Anything But Debian. Since I'm
Phillip> providing for users beyond
-->"Paul" == Paul Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> My point to David was simply that egg packaging in the .egg form is
>> more akin to Stow than to CPAN, so most of the flaws of CPAN are
>> not applicable to them.
Paul> Sorry, I don't know what Stow is, so that doesn't clarify things
-->"Phillip" == Phillip J Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Phillip> This is a major advantage over developers who do not do this,
Phillip> not only in developer effectivness, but also because a
Phillip> developer who depends exclusively on a specific packaging
Phillip> system will not have
6 matches
Mail list logo
