Mark Hammond gmail.com> writes:
> I don't understand the relationship between this "stock launcher" and
> the PEP 397 launcher. They seem to have quite distinct requirements
> without much overlap. Specifically, I'm not aware that the current PEP
> 397 implementation could perform the same r
Nick Coghlan gmail.com> writes:
> In that case: Vinay, please revert everything from the pyvenv commit
> that was actually related to issue #12394 rather than being part of
> the PEP 405 implementation. As Carl says, it's an unrelated change
> that needs to be discussed separately.
There's nothi
Georg Brandl gmx.net> writes:
> Agreed. Vinay, please either let me know when this is rectified (see also
> Nick's request about reverting #12394 specific parts of the commit), or
> revert the whole PEP 405 implementation for now, if the time is too short:
> I don't want to delay the alpha much
Am 29.05.2012 01:15, schrieb mar...@v.loewis.de:
>> Comments welcome, especially on whether Windows users agree that
>> something like this is needed in the absence of PEP 397 in Python 3.3.
>
> AFAICT, there is no need to check in the binary into revision control.
> Instead, the Windows build p
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Carl Meyer wrote:
> On 05/28/2012 04:24 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> It would have been better if the issue of script management on Windows
>> had been raised in PEP 405 itself - I likely would have declared PEP
>> 397 a dependency *before* accepting it (even if tha
On 05/28/2012 04:24 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> It would have been better if the issue of script management on Windows
> had been raised in PEP 405 itself - I likely would have declared PEP
> 397 a dependency *before* accepting it (even if that meant the feature
> missed the alpha 4 deadline and firs
Vinay originally wrote:
PEP 397 (Python launcher for Windows) has not yet been accepted, so there still
needs to be some way of natively launching scripts in Windows which is
equivalent to /path/to/venv/bin/foo. The way setuptools (and hence Distribute)
does this is to shadow each script with an
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 5:37 AM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
> Antoine Pitrou pitrou.net> writes:
>
>> Regardless of what the executable is or does, its source code must be
>> included somewhere in the Python source tree (and, preferably, there
>> should be a simple procedure to build the binaries).
>
> I
Comments welcome, especially on whether Windows users agree that
something like this is needed in the absence of PEP 397 in Python 3.3.
AFAICT, there is no need to check in the binary into revision control.
Instead, the Windows build process should create, package, and deploy
them, and venv sho
On Mon, 28 May 2012 21:23:50 + (UTC)
Vinay Sajip wrote:
> Antoine Pitrou pitrou.net> writes:
>
> > Not necessarily, but OTOH, it is not really standard procedure to
> > commit half-finished patches.
>
> I didn't want to miss the window for the upcoming alpha, and and I'm not sure
> exactly
Antoine Pitrou pitrou.net> writes:
> Not necessarily, but OTOH, it is not really standard procedure to
> commit half-finished patches.
I didn't want to miss the window for the upcoming alpha, and and I'm not sure
exactly how things will pan out with respect to PEP 397 and packaging. If people
On Mon, 28 May 2012 19:37:55 + (UTC)
Vinay Sajip wrote:
> Antoine Pitrou pitrou.net> writes:
>
> > Regardless of what the executable is or does, its source code must be
> > included somewhere in the Python source tree (and, preferably, there
> > should be a simple procedure to build the bina
Antoine Pitrou pitrou.net> writes:
> Regardless of what the executable is or does, its source code must be
> included somewhere in the Python source tree (and, preferably, there
> should be a simple procedure to build the binaries).
I understand that. Does it need to be checked in right now? It
On Mon, 28 May 2012 17:25:10 + (UTC)
Vinay Sajip wrote:
>
> The foo.exe file is just a copy of a stock launcher executable which finds its
> name from the C argv[0], and based in that name (foo in this case), invokes
> foo-script.py or foo-script.pyw with the appropriate Python interpreter.
In the recent check-in I made of the PEP 405 functionality, there is a Windows
executable. Antoine asked what this was in his comment on the checkin, but I
couldn't respond via Gmane (my usual method) as for some reason his post
doesn't appear there.
PEP 397 (Python launcher for Windows) has not y
15 matches
Mail list logo
