On 6/12/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Phillip J. Eby</b> <<a href="mailto:pje@telecommunity.com">pje@telecommunity.com</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
At 02:00 AM 6/13/2006 +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote:<br>>IMO, the better way is exactly this you depicted: move the official<br>>development<br>>tree into this Externals/ dir *within* Python's repository. Off that, you can
<br>>have your own branch for experimental work, from which extract your own<br>>releases, and merge changes back and forth much more simply (since if they<br>>reside on the same repository, you can use svnmerge-like features to find out
<br>>modifications and whatnot).<br><br>Yes, that's certainly what seems ideal for me as an external developer. I<br>don't know if it addresses the core developers' concerns, though, since it<br>would mean having Python code that lives outside of the Lib/ subtree, tests
<br>that live under other places thatn Lib/test, and documentation source that<br>lives outside of Doc/. But if those aren't showstoppers then it seems like<br>a winner to do it for 2.6.</blockquote><div><br>As long as this is the exception and not the rule, I am fine with this personally. ctypes already has its tests in its package directory and no one has complained yet (and I didn't find it a problem since the traceback lists the file location of the failing test).
<br><br>Not every contributed piece of code should go in there, though, if the contributor has not shown a certain level of dedication to their personal userbase and thus cover the inconvenience put on python-dev of having two different places to check for everything.
<br><br>And obviously the hope would be to eventually have something moved from Extensions after a certain amount of time and merged into the rest of the tree so that the dichotomy does not become a huge burden.<br><br>On the other hand, the example of ctypes of having tests kept in the package directory instead of Lib/test might be a good thing overall, regardless of whether the package is from the outside or not. That would leave the package location and docs as the only two places you would need to check for chagnes and might help with organizing and promote smaller unit test files for packages that spread their tests across multiple files.
<br><br>-Brett<br></div></div>