Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 3:32 PM, kiorky <kiorky@cryptelium.net> wrote:
And also, to use them together, what a hell. For package A i need 0.6 (hard requirement), for package B i need 0.7 (hard requirement), for C i need 0.6. C depend on A which depends on B. I also have no sort of control over the maintenance of those products, think that the authors are dead. So, i ll have to manually install B for A to fulfill its requirements then C will install. Deployments will be simple :)
It seems that you make the false assumption that a system can't have 0.6 and 0.7
No, this is not the case.
at the same time. The "setuptools" package does not exists in 0.7 for example they are mutualy distinct.
This may be quite current even if it's not a good habit to have circular dependencies between distributions. Imagine that. B(0.7) -> A(0.6). A(0.6) -> B(0.7). Can i have the same namespace "ns" shared between the twice distributions with both the setuptools namespaces implementation (A) and the pkg_util's one (B)? "Have" mean that i can import ns in both distributions. So, if: * I have old distributions with C code even not declaring they are relying on setuptools, installing with the 0.6 code automatically. * I have entry points and namespaces from 0.7 available to import in 0.6 and vice-versa. I will see no more objections. Another related thing, as i read the pep376 implementation, it may be good and easy to provide some wrappers to some setuptools very used objects like WorkingSet or Environment as similary code is already implemented to smoothly migrate existing code.
Tarek
-- -- Cordialement, KiOrKY GPG Key FingerPrint: 0x1A1194B7681112AF