[Distutils] Installing large applications
bob at redivi.com
Tue Jun 15 22:54:57 EDT 2004
On Jun 15, 2004, at 10:25 PM, Tim Peters wrote:
> [Bob Ippolito]
>> Nothing is stopping you from doing sys.path.insert(0, ...) in lieu of
>> addsitedir, so long as you don't have to process additional pth files.
> Not even good taste <0.5 wink>? .pth files weren't intended to be a
> generally-programmable alternative to site-customize.py, and relying
> on that
> site.py happens to exec entire lines starting with "import" seems
> abusive to
> me. Stuffing arbitrary executable code on the same line after an
> import is
> a trick, and one I wouldn't count on sticking around. As Guido said
> the Python developers have no idea why .pth files exec lines starting
> "import", and that doesn't bode well for the future of this trick.
Well, I find it incredibly convenient, because pth files don't do
os.path.expanduser and offer you no control over WHERE in sys.path it
goes. For example, I use a pth file to override Python 2.3.0's
slower-than-molasses date parser with the one from 2.3.3 without
modifying the python installation itself. PYTHONPATH is definitely not
> Guido had a different solution in 1999. Because it doesn't involve
> tricks, envars, or changing anything in the installed Python, nobody
> it <wink>:
> It's not really a solution "for ZODB", though.
Well the easiest way to do versioning in Python is just to include the
version in the name of your top level package. Otherwise, I agree with
Guido's recommendation.. That's more or less what I do when I
distribute standalone applications. I have private copies of every
non-standard-library component in some place that the application
"owns" and I make sure they end up early on sys.path when and only when
the application executes.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 2357 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20040615/d19a60ab/smime.bin
More information about the Distutils-SIG