On Jan 20, 2010, at 02:43 PM, David Lyon wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Jesse Noller wrote: >> A SCM is not a "package management system". > >Exactly. It almost makes the need for a "package management system" >pretty much obsolete if you can update your code directly from >the developers sources. > >That's what all these SCMs provide. Plus it's addictive. It's >hard to go back to 'package' style technology once you have >all your code on an SCM based feed. Well... I'm not so sure. A package management system like apt does a /ton/ of additional bookkeeping and work to ensure a robust, highly consistent, functioning system. And while both Python and most Linux distributions have their own notion of "package management", they don't always play nicely together. Tarek and the distutils-sig's work is trying to make the world a better place by bridging this gap better, and there is code out there that makes it easier to say import a Python package from the Cheeseshop and .deb-ify it for use on Debian and Ubuntu. There's also work being done in Launchpad that will allow you to "build-from-branch" so that in a sense you could let a build farm take your Bazaar branches and automatically build the packages from them. I've strayed off-topic I suppose, but I see SCMs and package managers as complementary technologies that help with important parts of the process of delivering software to end-users, but I don't quite see how one can make the other obsolete. -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 835 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20100119/4be8f756/attachment-0005.pgp>
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