[Import-SIG] Is ".ns" really the right extension?

P.J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Sun Jul 10 05:50:37 CEST 2011

At 04:58 PM 7/9/2011 -0600, Eric Snow wrote:
>If two contributions are added into the same directory (a la that last
>example) is there a way of telling programatically what portions came
>from which contribution?

See PEP 376, which addresses that issue.

>Also, if two contributions are made to a namespace package on the same
>sys.path entry, they must go into the same directory, right?


>   Is there
>a way around that, like using zip files or something (might we find
>all three above examples in site-packages)?  The idea of having them
>in separate plain directories (without __init__.py) for the same
>sys.path entry is part of what motivated my earlier confusion.

Where did you get that idea from?  Was there a particular part of the 
PEP I should change to avoid creating that idea, or did you have it 
before you read the new draft?

>Finally, say a portion is "contributed" to an existing non-namespace
>package [directory], turning it into a namespace package.  The package
>is then impacted by PEP 382 (particularly regarding __init__.py) when
>it may not have been developed for use as a namespace package.  Is
>this case worth considering?

The same thing would happen now if you installed two distributions 
containing files for the same package.  So no, I don't think it's 
worth elaborating on.  The PEP is starting to get kind of long as it 
is; I'm already a little worried about backlash when this goes back 
to Python-Dev, actually, *despite* the fact that it's more precisely 
specified, simpler, etc. than the previous shorter version.   :-(

More information about the Import-SIG mailing list