[Chicago] import question

[Massimo Di Pierro]

I am not convinced but perhaps we can join us and help us do it.

I will look more in detal into the py2exe docs. thank you.

Massimo

On Jan 23, 2008, at 2:01 PM, Kumar McMillan wrote:

> On Jan 23, 2008 1:42 PM, Massimo Di Pierro  
> <mdipierro at cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
>> Sorry but I follow a different philosophy in web2py.
>> While my users are free to run from source and install any module
>> they want, I try to make it easier for them.
>
> why is this a "different" philosophy?  We're just suggesting that your
> approach of transforming each 3rd party module into a submodule will
> create lots of tedious work since you will likely have to change
> import paths in multiple places, those places varying each time the
> package changes.  If you were to bundle your dependencies in a way
> similar to how python allows one to install a dependency, your life
> might be a lot easier and your users' lives will not get any harder
> (this is all an implementation detail that they don't need to know
> about anyway).
>
> The 6th or so line on the py2exe FAQ is this:
>
> "After py2exe has done its magic, you should have a "dist" directory
> with all the files necessary to run your python script. No install
> necessary. Click and run. No DLL hell, nothing else to download."
>
> it goes on to say, one of the dist files is "library.zip," a standard
> zip file where all the pure source modules will be inserted.  Is that
> not a place you can put 3rd party libs?  If you are trying to get this
> working in py2exe only as an option then when not in py2exe you should
> be able to use a custom sys.path; I don't see why not.
>
> http://www.py2exe.org/index.cgi/FAQ
>
>
>>
>> They must be able to find a appliance they like from the appliances
>> web site http://mdp.cti.depaul.edu/appliances (source of bytecode
>> compiled), click on it and have it running on their web2py  
>> installation.
>>
>> My users are not supposed to know anything about dependencies.
>>
>> Third party packages are either in the contrib folder (when the
>> license permits it) which I maintain and gets updated every new
>> web2py release, or in packaged in the appliances (again compatibly
>> with licenses). The developers and the consumers of the appliances
>> are free to upgrade those packages as they like but it their
>> responsibility not to break them.  I guarantee my users that web2py
>> upgrades (and relative contrib modules upgrades) do not break
>> appliances.
>>
>> Massimo
>>
>> On Jan 23, 2008, at 1:21 PM, Tim Ottinger wrote:
>>
>>> Pete wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday January 23 2008 12:34:32 pm Massimo Di Pierro wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> When people write code, they should not assume that their modules
>>>>> are
>>>>> going to be installed in site-packages or in a location in  
>>>>> sys.path.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Umm, yes, they should.  Prior to 2.5's relative imports, you
>>>> didn't have a
>>>> choice, and I don't think relative imports solve every situation.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps *you* shouldn't assume you can just take someone's code
>>>> and install it
>>>> however you happen to feel like today and expect it to work.
>>>>
>>> Especially if you have some kind of package management like apt
>>> or YUM or the like.  If you embed it, the users won't get upgrades.
>>> Better to have your package include a list of dependencies so the
>>> installer can take care of it.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Chicago mailing list
>>> Chicago at python.org
>>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/chicago
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Chicago mailing list
>> Chicago at python.org
>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/chicago
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Chicago mailing list
> Chicago at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/chicago