Eggs, VirtualEnv, and Apt - best practices?
nick at craig-wood.com
Thu Sep 25 22:30:03 CEST 2008
Scott Sharkey <ssharkey at linuxunlimited.com> wrote:
B> Our development group at work seems to be heading towards adopting
> python as one of our standard "systems languages" for internal
> application development (yeah!). One of the issues that's come up is
> the problem with apt (deb packages) vs eggs, vs virtual environments.
> We're probably gonna end up using Pylons or TurboGears for web-based
> apps, and I've recommended virtualenv, but one of the other developers
> has had some "inconsistencies" when mixing systems with python installed
> from apt (all our servers are debian or ubuntu based) vs when installed
> under virtualenv.
> I have basically recommended that we only install the python base (core
> language) from apt, and that everything else should be installed into
> virtual environments. But I wanted to check to see how other enterprises
> are handling this issue? Are you building python from scratch, or using
> specific sets of .deb packages, or some other process.
> Any insight into the best way to have a consistent, repeatable,
> controllable development and production environment would be much
I'll admit to not knowing what you mean by virtual environment...
In our debian systems we use python from apt and all modules from apt.
If there is a module we can't find then we build it into a .deb using
setup.py to build an rpm and converting to a .deb.
The app is then tested with "etch" or whatever.
If easy_install could build debs that would be really helpful!
> Suggestions on build/rollout tools (like zc.buildout, Paver, etc) would
> also be appreciated.
Use setup.py to build into .debs is what we do.
Nick Craig-Wood <nick at craig-wood.com> -- http://www.craig-wood.com/nick
More information about the Python-list