On Sep 23, 2008, at 5:44 PM, Rick Warner wrote:
Jeff Younker wrote:
I have to say, as a developer, and a system administrator, I like setuptools. It does what I need. Could it be better? Sure. For what I use python for on a day-to-day basis it makes my life a thousand times better than it was before setuptools. Nothing ruins your day more than spending *hours* tracing down package dependencies just to get the *one* package you need to allow you to perform some crucial task. It's even worse when you have to do it on multiple architectures.
Perl's package location and installation system (CPAN) is one of the primary facts contributing to its success. Perl is a pig. It's a charming pig that can do lots of tricks, but a pig none the less. What makes it shine is CPAN. And here's the catch: CPAN isn't really any better than setuptools. It's got warts and nuts all over the place, but it works.
And CPAN has some HUGE advantages over setuptools: it is designed as a repository, and it is replicated. Which means it is dependable. Anyone who suffered through the multiple outages of PyPI (which in not replicated) over the past year or so, or the ongoing outages of the many repositories across the web to which PyPI directs users/ processes, can understand why this is important.
Actually, PyPI is replicated. See, for example, http://download.zope.org/simple/ .
It may be that some of the mirrors should be better advertised.
-- Jim Fulton Zope Corporation