[Distutils] moving things forward

[Chris Barker]

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Greg Ewing <greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz>
wrote:

> Chris Barker wrote:
>
> OK -- that's more or less my thought -- if it's  python that gets run,
>> then you've got your config generator built in -- why not?
>>
>
> The difference is that the config generator only gets run
> once, when the config info needs to get produced. If the
> config file itself is executable, it needs to be run each
> time the config info gets *used*


exactly -- maybe some run-time configuration specialization? though maybe
that's exactly what we want to avoid.



> -- which could be by a
> tool for which running arbitrary python code is awkward or
> undesirable.


This is python packaging, I'm still trying to see why you'd need to read
the config without python available.

But I think the key point is -- do we want to enforce that the config data
is static -- it WILL not change depending on when or how or where it is
read?

If so, then yeah, no runnable code.

-CHB




-- 

Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer

Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR&R            (206) 526-6959   voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
Seattle, WA  98115       (206) 526-6317   main reception

Chris.Barker at noaa.gov
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20160505/ba1f8b6f/attachment-0001.html>