Re: -nspkg.pth and .pth files - should we get rid of them?

To: debian-python@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: -nspkg.pth and .pth files - should we get rid of them?
From: Julien Cristau <julien.cristau@logilab.fr>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 09:29:35 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] 20150720072935.GA1918@sh76.dev.logilab.fr>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20150719192831.GD25549@p1otr.com>
References: <[🔎] 20150719192831.GD25549@p1otr.com>

On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 21:28:32 +0200, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:

> Should we patch distutils/setuptools to not generate them? It generates
> them even for Python 3.X (which has PEP420 implemented)

Please don't.  Using an pkg_resources-style vs PEP420 namespace should
be an upstream decision made individually for each namespace.

Cheers,
Julien
-- 
Julien Cristau          <julien.cristau@logilab.fr>
Logilab		        http://www.logilab.fr/
Informatique scientifique & gestion de connaissances

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: -nspkg.pth and .pth files - should we get rid of them?
  - From: Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org>

References:
- -nspkg.pth and .pth files - should we get rid of them?
  - From: Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org>

Prev by Date: -nspkg.pth and .pth files - should we get rid of them?
Next by Date: Re: -nspkg.pth and .pth files - should we get rid of them?
Previous by thread: -nspkg.pth and .pth files - should we get rid of them?
Next by thread: Re: -nspkg.pth and .pth files - should we get rid of them?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread