[Distutils] Proposed bdist_dumb fix

[M.-A. Lemburg]

Andrew MacIntyre wrote:

> >From: Thomas Heller [mailto:theller@python.net]
> >Sent: Friday, 22 November 2002 7:45 AM
> >To: akuchlin@mems-exchange.org
> >Cc: distutils-sig@python.org
> >Subject: Re: [Distutils] Proposed bdist_dumb fix
> >
> >
> >
> >>>I has to use '--from-root 0' command-line flag, is it
> >
> >supposed to work this way,
> >
> >>>needing an argument?
> >>
> >>Well, if we want to stay backward compatible with the old behaviour,
> >>from-root has to default to true, so you need to supply an
> >
> >argument of
> >
> >>0 to turn it off.  Do we feel comfortable changing the default to
> >>false?  (I don't have a problem with that, and have done so in the
> >>revised patch.)  Or we could turn the option around and have it be
> >>a --relative option instead.
> >
> >I don't care too much - won't use it anyway. Otherwise I
> >would probably
> >like --relative more.
> >
> >What surprised me is that you have to supply an argument to a boolean
> >option. bdist_wininst has a --keep-temp boolean flag, but this doesn't
> >need an argument. Neither does --verbose or --quiet.
>
>
> I recall someone (MAL?) not wanting the default changed.  I think
> I prefer the --relative approach.

IMHO, when extending distutils you should always keep the current
defaults and add new functionality via options. A --relative
option sounds like the way to go.

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH
_______________________________________________________________________
eGenix.com -- Makers of the Python mx Extensions: mxDateTime,mxODBC,...
Python Consulting:                               http://www.egenix.com/
Python Software:                    http://www.egenix.com/files/python/