> > No one asked or even suggested I rename pip when I announced the name,
> > someone merely noted that a tool with the same name existed.
>
> I would consider an existing Perl, Python, PHP in any of the big repositories
> with the same command line a huge red flag, because automated packages
>
Just to confirm my intuition, I did a little bit of research:
* Perl pip 1.16 was release November 2009, pip 0.13 (the previous version)
was released December 2007. There's no evidence of development in the svn
repository between those times, why 0.13 jumped to 1.16 I don't know.
* Python pip 0.2
Lyj39W22XRn0
> UESva2Q9Twk4t+TF72RkyTlMiuYPKaWFk77D/3LOPXc/K+yNND9qQDPt2LGEIlNN
> SIf1kM2RteO+lKG2BBqE3IvQTUZ7A2a9C4afYaotIZp/QLjMd8q22MJFFnyzUR9d
> yxMXcA5qqkYh0or5smBN
> =WPsA
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
>
--
Ian Bicking | http://blog.ianbicking.org | http://twitter.com/ianbicking
is
localized to a Python-specific environment. Which I guess makes me think:
I'm not particularly concerned with the system-level packaging of pip, as I
think system-level Python libraries should be installed through the Debian
packaging system, and pip (which doesn't use Debian packages) sho
I'm also getting this behavior, after trying to reinstall postgresql-8.3.
I can remove (apt-get purge) both postgresql-8.3 and postgresql-common, and
then reinstall, and nothing is put into /etc/postgresql
I've also tried dpkg-reconfigure, and it doesn't do anything.
5 matches
Mail list logo
