Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> writes: > On Jul 23, 2010, at 01:46 PM, schmir at gmail.com wrote: > >>Doesn't anybody else think this is lost work for very little gain? My >>/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages directory consumes 200MB on disk. I >>couldn't care less if my /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages consumed the >>same amount of disk space... > > Right, you probably don't care now that your extension modules live in foo.so > so it probably won't make much difference if they were named foo-blahblah.so, > as long as they import. :) Most of the time it won't make much difference, right. But I can assure you, that it will bite some people and there is some code to be adapted. > > If you use Debian or Ubuntu though, it'll be a win for you by allow us to make > Python support much more robust. I'd much prefer to have cleanly separated environments by having separate directories for my python modules. Sharing the source code and complicating things will not lead to increased robustness. - Ralf
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