RetroSearch Browse

Wed Apr 15 19:59:34 CEST 2009 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-April/088772.html

At 06:15 PM 4/15/2009 +0200, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>The much more common use case is that of wanting to have a base package
>installation which optional add-ons that live in the same logical
>package namespace.

Please see the large number of Zope and PEAK distributions on PyPI as 
minimal examples that disprove this being the common use case.  I 
expect you will find a fair number of others, as well.

In these cases, there is NO "base package"...  the entire point of 
using namespace packages for these distributions is that a "base 
package" is neither necessary nor desirable.

In other words, the "base package" scenario is the exception these 
days, not the rule.  I actually know specifically of only one other 
such package besides your mx.* case, the logilab ll.* package.

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-April/088772.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 382: Namespace Packages