[Patches] [ python-Patches-1298835 ] vendor-packages directory.

[SourceForge.net]

Patches item #1298835, was opened at 2005-09-22 08:12
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by richburridge
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=1298835&group_id=5470

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: Library (Lib)
Group: Python 2.4
>Status: Closed
>Resolution: Invalid
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Rich Burridge (richburridge)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: vendor-packages directory.

Initial Comment:
Python needs a .../python2.x.y/vendor-packages directory
for vendor supplied Python files.

See:

http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2005-September/300029.html

for the full reasoning behind this request.

I also approached Guido w.r.t. this. Here's his reply.

Subject: Re: Python vendor-packages directory in a
future Python release?
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 19:48:40 -0700
From: Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org>
Reply-To: Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org>
To: Rich Burridge <Rich.Burridge at Sun.COM>
References: <4330C108.4030100 at sun.com>

I think that's a reasonable request. (In the mean time,
I think that
using site-packages is fine as an interim solution.)

I suggest that you use the SourceForge patch manager
for the Python
project to upload your patch, and then post to
python-dev. You may be
asked to review 5 other patches in order to have
someone look at your
favorite patch.

--Guido


----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Rich Burridge (richburridge)
Date: 2005-09-29 07:47

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=511506

A good alternative solution to this problem was given on the
python-devel
mailing list. See:

 
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-September/056697.html

 
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-September/056699.html

The architectural commitee have approved this solution, so
I'm closing
this bug as "Invalid". If there'd been a "Withdrawn"
resolution, I'd have
closed it that way instead. Perhaps that's what Deleted is
supposed to
do. Feel free to tweak if I've selected the wrong closure.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Terry J. Reedy (tjreedy)
Date: 2005-09-23 16:49

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=593130

The reason for this patch given in the referred-to post is:

"We have been told that this directory is inappropriate for vendor 
supplied packages, just as "site_perl" is inappropriate for Perl. 
With Perl, vendor supplied packages go under "vendor_perl". "

where 'this directory' is site-packages, which works fine.

The python-dev thread subequent to this posting starts with
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-
September/056682.html
A subsequent post
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-
September/056696.html
clarifies that 'vendor supplied packages' here means packages 
installed by the system/OS vendor.

Disconnected (in the pipermail archives) pieces of the thread 
start here
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-
September/056697.html
and here
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-
September/056702.html

This last suggests that this proposal is on hold while a .pth 
solution is explored.






----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=1298835&group_id=5470