Packaging and dependencies (was: setuptools without unexpected downloads)
bignose+hates-spam at benfinney.id.au
Wed Sep 26 10:08:44 CEST 2007
"Diez B. Roggisch" <deets at nospam.web.de> writes:
> In my opinion, python is steering here to a direction like Java with
> it's classpath: scripts like workingenv and it's successor (forgot
> the name) provide hand-tailored environments for a specific
What a silly waste of resources. So, if fifteen different programs
depend on library X, we'd have fifteen *separate* installations of
library X on the same machine?
And when it comes time to upgrade library X because a security flaw is
discovered, each of the fifteen instances must be upgraded separately?
> So maybe you should rather try and bundle your app in a way that it
> is self-contained.
That entirely defeats the purpose of having packages declare
dependencies on each other. The whole point of re-usable library code
is to *avoid* having to re-bundle every dependency with every separate
\ "If [a technology company] has confidence in their future |
`\ ability to innovate, the importance they place on protecting |
_o__) their past innovations really should decline." -- Gary Barnett |
More information about the Python-list