FW: [Distutils] adding docs/samples to bdist ??

Moore, Paul Paul.Moore@uk.origin-it.com
Wed Nov 1 04:14:02 2000

Meant to include the list in the reply...

-----Original Message-----
From: Moore, Paul 
Sent: 31 October 2000 09:17
To: 'Pete Shinners'
Subject: RE: [Distutils] adding docs/samples to bdist ??

From: Pete Shinners [mailto:pete@visionart.com]
> i'd like to start using distutils to create my source and
> binary distributions. everything is working for the most part
> (i have a feeling i'll be looking into the code for further
> refinements :]). anyways, when i create my binary distribution
> it is not packaging any of the examples or help files. i 
> guess the problem is; where should these files go???
> it seems like this type of stuff hasn't been nailed down yet?

As a relative newcomer, my feeling is that you're probably right. It feels
to me (having come from Perl) that Python doesn't have a particularly
formalised installation directory structure. You can just drop the .py and
.pyd files anywhere in sys.path, and it works.

While this is great for rapid development and prototyping, I believe that a
more formal definition of where installed code should be stored would be
useful. I've already raised the question on comp.lang.python of having a
proper "site packages" directory on Windows. Having standard directory
structures for things like sample code and help files may also be useful.

First question - is this sort of issue within the remit of this SIG?

If so, is there any interest in defining a standard directory structure?

And finally, assuming we do want to do this, can anyone give a reasonably
complete explanation of what currently goes into sys.path, where it comes
from, and what the reasons for the current practice are? (Assuming the
answers to the first two questions are "yes", I'm willing to do the research
on this one, but I can't provide the rationale...)