RetroSearch Browse

Wed Jul 20 15:57:07 CEST 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-July/112363.html

On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 23:58:55 -0400, "P.J. Eby" <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
> Worse, this is not just a problem for new users: it prevents *anyone*
> from easily splitting a package into separately-installable
> components.  In Perl terms, it would be as if every possible ``Net::``
> module on CPAN had to be bundled up and shipped in a single tarball!

In general the simplicity of the proposed mechanism and implementation
is attractive.  However, this bit of discussion struck me as sending the
wrong message.  We don't *want* something like the CPAN module
hierarchy.  I prefer to keep things as flat as practical.  Namespace
packages clearly have utility, but please let's not descend into
java-esq package hierarchies.

--
R. David Murray           http://www.bitdance.com

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-July/112363.html below:

"Simplified Package Layout and Partitioning"