Pete Shinners wrote:
these aren't bdist related, but general features i'd like to see included with distutils (at some point) :]
* no documentation files are installed -- is there a way to get those installed somewhere
mmm, a python standard location for documentation would be a big help. all my docs are currently in HTML, but i'm sure many people are using a variety of formats. nonetheless, if python had a standard format/location for documentation i think the all users would benefit. perhaps distutils laying out some sort of resonable standard on its own would be enough to get the whole community to adopt it? (of course, some documentation browsing tools in python would be a nice followup)
Right. I'd suggest to take Martin's approach on Unix and a distutils convention on Windows (e.g. \Python\Site-Docs).
* the installer doesn't register itself in the Windows Software registry -- an uninstall is not possible (this would be *very* nice to have)
i was recently noticing some sort of "uninstall" would be a handy feature from the commandline. technically, i would assume distutils could take the list of files to install and simple erase the files instead. then if the containing folder was empty, remove the folder.
Right, this should work. The install process would have to keep a list of installed files in some standard location (and for each package) though.
anyways, back to the bdist specific issues
* the installer install directly into \Python20 -- shouldn't it install to \Python20\Lib ? What's the standard here on Windows ?
distutils on windows always installs to this directory. bdist or otherwise. i don't see any need for change?
See my other post. I don't really think that extensions should go into \Python directly; a directory like the one on Unix would be better, e.g. \Python\Site-Packages, IMHO at least. -- Marc-Andre Lemburg ______________________________________________________________________ Company: http://www.egenix.com/ Consulting: http://www.lemburg.com/ Python Pages: http://www.lemburg.com/python/