[Python-Dev] PEP: per user site-packages directory

[Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven]

One thing I miss in this PEP and discussion is the point of view from a
webhosting company and webhosting user.

If the webhoster upgrades his hosting software and Python get updated by a
revision (say 2.5 to 2.6) this would in the current case mean that the
webhosting user using per-user site-packages is out of luck due to the
hard-wired (and apparently needed) version identifier. Or is that a wrong
assumption on my side?

Right now Python faces a lot of problems in the webhosting world because it's
tedious to set up and maintain for the webhosting user since they often have
to compile and install their own Python in their home directory. The per-user
site-packages will help in that aspect a lot, I think, but we do need to
detail some more use-cases and scenarios (patterns if you like) on how such
deployments would work.
I think this is extremely important due to the proliferation of Python now
more and more as a choice for webapp development.

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai
イェルーン ラウフロック ヴァン デル ウェルヴェン
http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/
The greatest of faults, I should say, is to be conscious of none...