On Feb 17, 2015, at 09:45 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >If Python zip applications got the ability to include binary extensions, they >would *definitely* not be portable (we don't want to go down the route of >wheel-like compatibility tags for an application file format). Agreed! >Currently, I'm trying to leave this aspect of the PEP open, so the PEP >describes what the format is and how it works, but doesn't try to imply >particular use cases. That way people can use it how they prefer, and the PEP >doesn't put people off with a lot of caveats. My current draft of the >documentation page for the zipapp module includes an example of setting a >shebang line, with some notes on issues to consider for a portable shebang >line if you propose distributing your application - but that's as far as I >want to go. I think that's totally reasonable. Admittedly, I was hijacking your PEP discussion for some pie-in-the-sky musing. :) Cheers, -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20150217/a3906f33/attachment.sig>
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