[buildout] selectively excluding site-packages
Hi Guys, I guess this is mainly aimed at Jim and Gary... How's the work to allow control over which packages come from site-packages and whether or not site-packages is considered by default? Anything I can do to help with this? cheers, Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
On Mar 17, 2010, at 5:39 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Hi Guys,
I guess this is mainly aimed at Jim and Gary...
How's the work to allow control over which packages come from site-packages and whether or not site-packages is considered by default?
Jim asked if I tested all branches with all pertinent Python versions. After almost two weeks, I replied "no." Only the branches that I considered deploying internally were tested in that way. I haven't heard if Jim wants me to make all branches pass that way, but I offered.
Anything I can do to help with this?
From my perspective, sure. Use the most recent branch and report problems. I'm sure there will be some. I need to make bootstrap more defensive, for instance. Maybe I'll have time for that today. bzr branch is lp:~gary/zc.buildout/python-support-8-support-subprocess and svn is http://svn.zope.org/repos/main/zc.buildout/branches/gary-8/ . Gary
Gary Poster wrote:
On Mar 17, 2010, at 5:39 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Hi Guys,
I guess this is mainly aimed at Jim and Gary...
How's the work to allow control over which packages come from site-packages and whether or not site-packages is considered by default?
Jim asked if I tested all branches with all pertinent Python versions. After almost two weeks, I replied "no." Only the branches that I considered deploying internally were tested in that way. I haven't heard if Jim wants me to make all branches pass that way, but I offered.
Ah, I thought you'd rolled all the branches up into one uber-branch?
From my perspective, sure. Use the most recent branch and report problems. I'm sure there will be some. I need to make bootstrap more defensive, for instance. Maybe I'll have time for that today.
bzr branch is lp:~gary/zc.buildout/python-support-8-support-subprocess and svn is http://svn.zope.org/repos/main/zc.buildout/branches/gary-8/ .
Okay, I'll see what I can do... Are these any docs on the new features on that branch? If so, where should I look? Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
On Mar 19, 2010, at 6:27 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Gary Poster wrote:
On Mar 17, 2010, at 5:39 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Hi Guys,
I guess this is mainly aimed at Jim and Gary...
How's the work to allow control over which packages come from site-packages and whether or not site-packages is considered by default? Jim asked if I tested all branches with all pertinent Python versions. After almost two weeks, I replied "no." Only the branches that I considered deploying internally were tested in that way. I haven't heard if Jim wants me to make all branches pass that way, but I offered.
Ah, I thought you'd rolled all the branches up into one uber-branch?
Each branch builds on the previous one, so that's pretty much true. (I am keeping the bzr branch lp:~gary/zc.buildout/python-support up-to-date with both trunk and my branches, but that's really more of an internal artifact.)
From my perspective, sure. Use the most recent branch and report problems. I'm sure there will be some. I need to make bootstrap more defensive, for instance. Maybe I'll have time for that today. bzr branch is lp:~gary/zc.buildout/python-support-8-support-subprocess and svn is http://svn.zope.org/repos/main/zc.buildout/branches/gary-8/ .
Okay, I'll see what I can do...
Are these any docs on the new features on that branch? If so, where should I look?
The user-visible part of the changes is in the z3c.recipe.scripts recipe contained within the zc.buildout checkout, like zc.recipe.egg. zc.recipe.egg has no user-visible changes and works mostly as before, providing hopefully full backwards compatibility. z3c.recipe.scripts has the logic to work with a Python that might have some site-packages hanging around. http://svn.zope.org/zc.buildout/branches/gary-8/z3c.recipe.scripts_/src/z3c/... Note that mixing a system python's site-packages and buildout eggs will, in my guess, always be less stable than trying to simply use a system Python without site-packages at all (the default behavior of the new recipe). See the discussion in the README file, which touches on the concerns but probably does not go far enough. That said, for "hysterical" reasons, I'm using the mixing approach right now myself. Gary
Gary Poster wrote:
Are these any docs on the new features on that branch? If so, where should I look?
The user-visible part of the changes is in the z3c.recipe.scripts recipe contained within the zc.buildout checkout, like zc.recipe.egg. zc.recipe.egg has no user-visible changes and works mostly as before, providing hopefully full backwards compatibility. z3c.recipe.scripts has the logic to work with a Python that might have some site-packages hanging around.
http://svn.zope.org/zc.buildout/branches/gary-8/z3c.recipe.scripts_/src/z3c/...
Note that mixing a system python's site-packages and buildout eggs will, in my guess, always be less stable than trying to simply use a system Python without site-packages at all (the default behavior of the new recipe). See the discussion in the README file, which touches on the concerns but probably does not go far enough. That said, for "hysterical" reasons, I'm using the mixing approach right now myself.
Suppose I'm starting fresh, (newbie at this, but wanting stability and new features). How do you best use buildout to "simply use a system Python without site-packages at all"? I'm OK with reading the code for comments. What to checkout? http://svn.zope.org/zc.buildout/branches/gary-8/z3c.recipe.scripts_ or http://svn.zope.org/zc.buildout/branches/gary-8 what rev? Thanks, John
On Mar 19, 2010, at 1:59 PM, John Griessen wrote:
Gary Poster wrote:
Are these any docs on the new features on that branch? If so, where should I look? The user-visible part of the changes is in the z3c.recipe.scripts recipe contained within the zc.buildout checkout, like zc.recipe.egg. zc.recipe.egg has no user-visible changes and works mostly as before, providing hopefully full backwards compatibility. z3c.recipe.scripts has the logic to work with a Python that might have some site-packages hanging around. http://svn.zope.org/zc.buildout/branches/gary-8/z3c.recipe.scripts_/src/z3c/... Note that mixing a system python's site-packages and buildout eggs will, in my guess, always be less stable than trying to simply use a system Python without site-packages at all (the default behavior of the new recipe). See the discussion in the README file, which touches on the concerns but probably does not go far enough. That said, for "hysterical" reasons, I'm using the mixing approach right now myself.
Suppose I'm starting fresh, (newbie at this, but wanting stability and new features). How do you best use buildout to "simply use a system Python without site-packages at all"? I'm OK with reading the code for comments.
If you are a newbie, I strongly suggest sticking with the released versions. What I have done has zero guarantee of Jim merging it. Moreover, the instructions on how a newbie can use this stuff from source are not worth my time or yours, IMO. I suspect those warnings are not what you want to hear, but I'm trying to be both helpful and up-front. On the other hand, if you are asking how you *would* use a system Python if my branches were merged, you would use the new version of zc.buildout, and use z3c.recipe.scripts where you normally would have used zc.recipe.egg, except for the advanced use case of zc.recipe.egg:custom, which should still be used from zc.recipe.egg. That's it. Gary
Gary Poster wrote:
If you are a newbie, I strongly suggest sticking with the released versions. What I have done has zero guarantee of Jim merging it.
If he doesn't, how about a fork? ;-)
Moreover, the instructions on how a newbie can use this stuff from source are not worth my time or yours, IMO.
I'm not so sure, can't see what should prevent a new user trying all of this...
On the other hand, if you are asking how you *would* use a system Python if my branches were merged, you would use the new version of zc.buildout, and use z3c.recipe.scripts where you normally would have used zc.recipe.egg,
Why is z3c.recipe.scripts required? Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
On Mar 19, 2010, at 5:02 PM, Chris Withers wrote:
Gary Poster wrote:
If you are a newbie, I strongly suggest sticking with the released versions. What I have done has zero guarantee of Jim merging it.
If he doesn't, how about a fork? ;-)
Rather not.
Moreover, the instructions on how a newbie can use this stuff from source are not worth my time or yours, IMO.
I'm not so sure, can't see what should prevent a new user trying all of this...
They would need to make eggs or sdists and put them in a download-cache, for instance. If you'd like to volunteer the support, go for it. :-)
On the other hand, if you are asking how you *would* use a system Python if my branches were merged, you would use the new version of zc.buildout, and use z3c.recipe.scripts where you normally would have used zc.recipe.egg,
Why is z3c.recipe.scripts required?
Backwards compatibility. It has the new behavior. zc.recipe.eggs has the old behavior. Gary
On 2010-03-19, at 10:59 AM, John Griessen wrote:
How do you best use buildout to "simply use a system Python without site-packages at all"?
What I do, as a workaround till buildout officially supports it, is to do this every time I run buildout: $ mv ..../site-packages ..../site-packages.oow $ bin/buildout $ mv ..../site-packages.oow ..../site-packages -srid
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:59:01PM -0500, John Griessen wrote:
Suppose I'm starting fresh, (newbie at this, but wanting stability and new features). How do you best use buildout to "simply use a system Python without site-packages at all"?
I'm using virtualenv to isolate my buildouts from site-packages: virtualenv --no-site-packages venv venv/bin/python bootstrap.py bin/buildout After step 2 you can forget that you have a virtualenv and use buildout normally. Marius Gedminas -- The *REAL* Y2K is the year 2048.
Gary Poster wrote:
Are these any docs on the new features on that branch? If so, where should I look?
The user-visible part of the changes is in the z3c.recipe.scripts recipe contained within the zc.buildout checkout, like zc.recipe.egg.
Sorry, you lost me there... I thought z3c.recipe.scripts was another package entirely. Have you merged it into zc.buildout? If so, why?
Note that mixing a system python's site-packages and buildout eggs will, in my guess, always be less stable
Hmm, I guess you just need to make sure that the buildout manages the system packages too... There must be a recipe which drive aptitude around somewhere? Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
On Mar 22, 2010, at 5:21 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Gary Poster wrote:
Are these any docs on the new features on that branch? If so, where should I look? The user-visible part of the changes is in the z3c.recipe.scripts recipe contained within the zc.buildout checkout, like zc.recipe.egg.
Sorry, you lost me there... I thought z3c.recipe.scripts was another package entirely.
Yes
Have you merged it into zc.buildout?
Yes
If so, why?
The same kind of reason that zc.buildout.eggs is part of the buildout checkout. The buildout tests rely on the functionality that z3c.recipe.scripts provides.
Note that mixing a system python's site-packages and buildout eggs will, in my guess, always be less stable
Hmm, I guess you just need to make sure that the buildout manages the system packages too... There must be a recipe which drive aptitude around somewhere?
Not to my knowledge. Gary
participants (5)
-
Chris Withers -
Gary Poster -
John Griessen -
Marius Gedminas -
Sridhar Ratnakumar