Phil Thompson wrote:
> On Friday 02 May 2008, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
>>> -On [20080502 10:50], Steve Holden (steve at holdenweb.com) wrote:
>>>> Groan. Then everyone else realizes what a "great idea" this is, and we
>>>> see ~/Perl/, ~/Ruby/, ~/C# (that'll screw the Microsoft users, a
>>>> directory with a comment market in its name), ~/Lisp/ and the rest? I
>>>> don't think people would thank us for that in the long term.
>>> I'm +1 on just using $HOME/.local, but otherwise $HOME/.python makes
>>> sense too. $HOME/.python.d doesn't do it for me, too clunky (and hardly
>>> used if I look at my .files in $HOME).
>>>
>>> But I agree with Steve that it should be a hidden directory.
>> This sums up my opinion pretty well. Hidden by default, but easy to
>> expose (e.g. via a local -> .local symlink) for the more experienced
>> users that want it more easily accessible.
>
> But you can't be serious about using such a generic word as "local" as the
> name??? At least include the letters "p" and "y" somewhere.
As glyph noted, the idea is that the layout inside ~/.local would be
modeled on that used inside /usr/local.
A lot of that was thrashed out during the original PEP 370 discussions
though - the current discussion relates purely to what would be visible
to the user at the home directory level, so the internal layout of the
.local directory hadn't really come up.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4