[Import-SIG] Is ".ns" really the right extension?
P.J. Eby
pje at telecommunity.com
Sun Jul 10 05:50:37 CEST 2011
At 04:58 PM 7/9/2011 -0600, Eric Snow wrote:
>If two contributions are added into the same directory (a la that last
>example) is there a way of telling programatically what portions came
>from which contribution?
See PEP 376, which addresses that issue.
>Also, if two contributions are made to a namespace package on the same
>sys.path entry, they must go into the same directory, right?
Yes.
> Is there
>a way around that, like using zip files or something (might we find
>all three above examples in site-packages)? The idea of having them
>in separate plain directories (without __init__.py) for the same
>sys.path entry is part of what motivated my earlier confusion.
Where did you get that idea from? Was there a particular part of the
PEP I should change to avoid creating that idea, or did you have it
before you read the new draft?
>Finally, say a portion is "contributed" to an existing non-namespace
>package [directory], turning it into a namespace package. The package
>is then impacted by PEP 382 (particularly regarding __init__.py) when
>it may not have been developed for use as a namespace package. Is
>this case worth considering?
The same thing would happen now if you installed two distributions
containing files for the same package. So no, I don't think it's
worth elaborating on. The PEP is starting to get kind of long as it
is; I'm already a little worried about backlash when this goes back
to Python-Dev, actually, *despite* the fact that it's more precisely
specified, simpler, etc. than the previous shorter version. :-(
More information about the Import-SIG
mailing list