Re: question on packaging of python applications
On 15 Nov 2000, Rob Tillotson wrote:
> How about the other way around? If the goal is to have 1.5.2 coexist
> with 2.0 on the same machine, this still presents a potential problem
> which will force packages to be dependent on one version or the
> other.
Correct: things built for 2.0 have a good chance not to work with 1.5.2.
> Another alternative, perhaps, would be to move to a system like the
> emacsen use -- that system solves a similar problem, namely that of
> alternative implementations of a particular kind of language
> interpreter that can share source code, but not byte-compiled files.
> Emacs add-ons are packaged as elisp source which is placed in a common
> location, then the infrastructure in the emacsen-common package
> compiles the source using each installed emacs.
That sounds like a wonderful idea!
> Of course, this is a solution for long-term coexistence, not for just
> a transition from one major version to the next. It's probably
> overkill for the current situation...
Oh, well, maybe you're right.
I wonder why the official Debian python-packages maintainer hasn't
commented...
--
Moshe Zadka <moshez@math.huji.ac.il> -- 95855124
http://advogato.org/person/moshez
Reply to: