[Python-Dev] Re: Patch level versions and new features (Was: Some dull gc stats)

[M.-A. Lemburg]

Delaney, Timothy wrote:
>>From: martin@v.loewis.de [mailto:martin@v.loewis.de]
>>
>>"M.-A. Lemburg" <mal@lemburg.com> writes:
>>
>>
>>>Perhaps we could have some kind of category for distutils
>>>packages which marks them as system add-ons vs. site add-ons.
>>
>>One approach would be for distutils to have a list of system packages
>>built-in, depending on the Python release.
> 
> 
> +1
> 
> Arbitrary package authors shouldn't be able to state that their package is a
> system package - that should be up to the core team.

Hmm, I don't really see the need to make this more complicated.

Package authors should be sensible enough to not create
system packages unless these are actually part of the
core or understood as optional but standard add-on (e.g. the
Japanese codecs could be such an add-on).

Besides, it's easy enough to achieve the same effect by
subclassing the install command in your setup.py, so there is
not much gained security there.

The only advantage I see in Martin's approach is that it
would seem backwards compatible, but then: installing a
system package in a pre-2.3 system would not have the
desired effect at all, so the gained backwards compatibility
can't really be put to use.

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH
_______________________________________________________________________
eGenix.com -- Makers of the Python mx Extensions: mxDateTime,mxODBC,...
Python Consulting:                               http://www.egenix.com/
Python Software:                    http://www.egenix.com/files/python/