[Distutils] Reverse dependencies
jim at zope.com
Mon May 14 12:58:58 CEST 2007
FWIW, I expect to have to implement this for buildout at some point.
I don't plan to do it until it becomes a priority. :)
WRT platform, I see this as an anti-solution. Fortunately, it looks
like it has already been dismissed. :) The reason I see this as an
anti-solution is that we already have a platform, namely Python 2.4,
that might be better treated as a dependency. For example, there
isn't a way, AFAIK, to state Python version requirements for source
releases. I think it might be cleaner if things like Python version
and maybe even size of unicode characters could be handled using the
On May 13, 2007, at 2:10 PM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> At 06:11 PM 5/13/2007 +0100, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>> Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>>> At 05:00 PM 5/13/2007 +0100, Martin Aspeli wrote:
>>>> But is there any support for such declarative "reverse"
>>> Sort of, in a very limited way. You'll get a version compatibility
>>> error if you depend on say, Plone<3 and your dependency depends on
>>> Plone>=3.1, for example. But there's no backtracking to resolve
>>> this, so the minute it happens your installation is basically dead
>>> until you get rid of the problematic package.
>> Comforting. :-)
>> Do you think it'd be a useful feature? I realise it may not be
>> immediately trivial to add. ;)
> No kidding. I believe it's potentially NP-complete, which is why I
> only implemented a non-backtracking version that always goes for the
> highest installed version of each package.
> If somebody else wants to take a look at designing a backtracking
> algorithm, take a look at the WorkingSet.resolve() method in
> Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG at python.org
Jim Fulton mailto:jim at zope.com Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714 http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org
More information about the Distutils-SIG