[Image-SIG] Some issue with easy_install and PIL/Imaging

[Fredrik Lundh]

The problem is that too many people arguing for eggs do this by
sending nastygrams, which doesn't really provide much motivation for
doing anything about it (I don't do asshole-driven development).  The
public review PIL got a couple a minutes ago matches some of the
private mail I've gotten:

   no egg - worst seen ever, remove it from pypi or provide an egg
(jensens, 2009-10-05, 0 points)

</F>

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Chris Withers <chris at simplistix.co.uk> wrote:
> Fredrik Lundh wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Chris Withers <chris at simplistix.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Klein Stéphane wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Resume :
>>>> 1. first question : why PIL package in "pypi" don't work ?
>>>
>>> Because Fred Lundh have his package distributions unfortunate names that
>>> setuptools doesn't like...
>>
>> It used to support this, but no longer does.  To me, that says more
>> about the state of setuptools than it does about the state of PIL,
>> which has been using the same naming convention for 15 years.
>
> Yep, but it is now in the minority, and consistency in package naming is
> always good.
>
> Would there be any problems for you in naming the distribution in a
> setuptools-friendly way from the next point release?
>
> cheers,
>
> Chris
>
> --
> Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting
>           - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
>