3 ms·
Not exactly - for example, I depend on fabric, PIP, easy_install, nose, pylint and others. In this case, it's not a matter of fixing upstream on a per-project b
by jnoller 17y ago
Not exactly - for example, I depend on fabric, PIP, easy_install, nose, pylint and others. In this case, it's not a matter of fixing upstream on a per-project basis, it's fixing distutils as this is "magical" behavior I (and others) have seen, and that's not a pile of gators I (or I suspect you) would want to wade into. For example read the following threads:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-July/090259.html http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-July/090259...
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-July/090356.html http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-July/090356...
And so on. I agree wholeheartedly though - library-only dependencies are stupid simple.
- moe 17y agoI just checked and interestingly I also depend on easy_install (which I don't even use, but put it in there someday), nose and pylint. None of them gave me problems. I say if fabric and PIP are broken then fix them. easy_install is irrelevant anyways, nobody in their right mind would use that on a production system.
- jnoller 17y agoI'm surprised having the hardcoded paths didn't bite you - of course, how frequently are you moving the interpreter, or installing multiple versions of the interpreter (with the same dependencies) with a shared bin dir?