RetroSearch Browse

Mon Aug 2 13:10:47 CEST 2010 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-August/102660.html

On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 3:06 AM, P.J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
..
>
> So without specific examples of why this is a problem, it's hard to see why
> a special Python-specific set of configuration files is needed to resolve
> it, vs. say, encouraging application authors to use the available
> alternatives for doing plugin directories, config files, etc.

I don't have a specific example in mind, and I must admit that if an
application does the right thing
(provide the right configuration file), this activate feature is not
useful at all. So it seems to be a bad idea.

I propose that we drop the PLUGINS file idea and we add a new metadata
field called Provides-Plugin
in PEP 345, which will contain the info I've described minus the state
field. This will allow us to expose
plugins at PyPI.

IOW, have entry points like setuptools provides, but in a metadata
field instead of a entry_points.txt file.

Tarek

-- 
Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-August/102660.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 376 proposed changes for basic plugins support