RetroSearch Browse

Wed Apr 9 03:37:07 CEST 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-April/078507.html

zooko <zooko at zooko.com> writes:

> I am skeptical that prorgammers are going to be willing to use a new
> database format. They already have a database -- their filesystem --
> and they already have the tools to control it -- mv, rm, and
> PYTHONPATH. Many of them already hate the existence the
> "easy_instlal.pth" database file, and I don't see why a new database
> file would be any different.

Moreover, many of us already have a database of *all* packages on the
system, not just Python-language ones: the package database of our
operating system. Adding another, parallel, database which needs
separate maintenance, and only applies to Python packages, is not a
step forward in such a situation.

> They both agreed that it made perfect sense. I told one of them
> about the alternate proposal to define a new database file to
> contain a list of installed packages, and he sighed and rolled his
> eyes and said "So they are planning to reinvent apt!".

That's pretty much my reaction, too.

-- 
 \      "Contentment is a pearl of great price, and whosoever procures |
  `\        it at the expense of ten thousand desires makes a wise and |
_o__)                                   happy purchase."  -- J. Balguy |
Ben Finney

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-April/078507.html below:

[Python-Dev] how to easily consume just the parts of eggs that are good for you