On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 4:08 PM, James Oakley
I love Python, and the people involved in it, but historically, the approach to new packaging features has been fork-and-eventually-replace. Some of those forks included "features" that have been downright hostile to distribution packagers, and I still instinctively scan packages for pointless runtime dependency checks. (Thank you, setuptools...) It's gotten better for sure, but the consensus just isn't there, and I doubt we will see one any time soon.
I've suffered that...
Even if they agreed on one-true-way, it would take years of discussion/implementation/deployment before we could use it. We need something we can implement today, using the packaging systems already in place.
Alternatives sounds OK at a first glance, but in contrast to the normal usage pattern of alternatives, the different python alternatives aren't interchangeable. System scripts will *need* python2.7 (not 2.6, not 2.8 if there was one), because each python version has a different set of extension modules installed. Apps will perhaps *need* python3.1, and won't work with 2.x. So it's not an alternative. They're two distinct environments. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org