RetroSearch Browse

Fri Jul 24 18:08:32 CEST 2009 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-July/090815.html

2009/7/24 Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net>:
> David Lyon schrieb:
>> On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 03:23:57 +0200, Christian Heimes <lists at cheimes.de>
>> wrote:
>>> I'm sorry to inform you that a wxWindows based solution has zero change
>>> to get into the Python standard library ever. We are not going to add
>>> another GUI toolkit to the core distribution.
>>
>> In executable form, the Package Manager does not require wxWidgets
>> to be installed.
>>
>> There is no dependency for this to be installed.
>
> What does "in exectuable form" mean?

I read this as meaning that David was proposing to ship a built
application (on Windows, bundled up with something like py2exe, I
guess) and any supporting DLLs such as the wxWindows ones would be
bundled in, but the wxPython package would *not* be shipped as part of
the standard library.

If my assumption is right, that makes the package manager
inappropriate for shipping with Python, whether or not there are other
issues.

In my view, for an "application" to be shipped with Python, whether it
be Idle, or a package manager, or pydoc, or whatever, it must:
- be written as a Python script
- depend only on packages shipped with the standard library

That is before any considerations of the value of the application itself.

Given that David's package manager uses setuptools to do the installs
(and now it appears it uses wxPython for its GUI) that immediately
disqualifies it for inclusion in my view - regardless of its value as
a package.

Paul.

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-July/090815.html below:

[Python-Dev] Update to Python Documentation Website Request