On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 16:54:50 +1000 (EST) Damien Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, > > Any comments on this? I'm particulalry interested in comments/criticsm > of the changes to python.port.mk > > Once this is in, I have a complete port of the Pylons web application > framework and its dependencies (inc. SQLObject and SQLAlchemy) > ready... does this mean your port of pylons will install pylons (and it's dependencies - i.e. sqlobject) via easy_install? does this mean, future python ports like sqlobject, turbogears, pylons, ... will install like this? IMHO this is not a good idea. because this will end up in multiple versions of multiple pieces of software in site-packages/ folder and the pkg_* tools does not really recognize/know them and its dependencies. i think its better to use classic distutils, since they do not download dependencies on its own and do not ignore pkg_* tools. so its possible better to install sqlobject, turbogears, ... with classic distutils and without easy_install. this should be no problem because easy_install is compatible with distutils. anyway: its good to have a port of py-setuptools, but i think it should not be used to "work-around" ports-framework. joerg
