[Chandler-dev] Keeping Feed and other parcels out of the end users' binaries

[Mike Taylor]

On Sep 1, 2006, at 6:20 PM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:

> At 06:05 PM 9/1/2006 -0400, Mike Taylor wrote:
>
>> On Sep 1, 2006, at 5:47 PM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>>
>>> At 01:44 PM 9/1/2006 -0700, Philippe Bossut wrote:
>>>> We could in the meantime provide the eggs for download off a Wiki 
>>>> looking pages as we do for snapshot builds so, for those who want 
>>>> them, they're not impossible to find in a user digestible form.
>>>
>>> Just as an FYI, running "setup.py register bdist_egg upload" in a 
>>> project directory will register the project with the Python 
>>> Cheeseshop and upload an egg.  There is a "long_description" field 
>>> that can be set in the setup script, and this is uploaded to the 
>>> project's cheeseshop page.  For example, see setuptools' Cheeseshop 
>>> page:
>>>
>>>     http://cheeseshop.python.org/pypi/setuptools
>>
>> The only concern I have with this is that we have not reached api 
>> stability so I would have to manage the Cheeseshop eggs just like I 
>> manage the current binary tarballs.  Otherwise we would see someone 
>> trying to install an egg built for 0.7alpha4 in the dogfood 0.6 
>> release.
>
> I was talking about distributing stable plugin releases, not about 
> development ones.  In any case, however, we can have the released 
> parcels specify what version of Chandler they require (down to the SVN 
> revision if necessary, so long as the PKG-INFO file is installed by 
> the Chandler binary release).
>
> Thus, trying to install the plugins with the wrong (or no) version of 
> Chandler using easy_install will produce an error message saying that 
> easy_install can't find a "Chandler 0.7" egg (or whatever version is 
> required).
>
> In any case, I was commenting only on Philippe's statement that we 
> might put the downloads up on a wiki page, noting that we can get the 
> same effect on a somewhat more automated basis.

Very true, I jumped a couple of steps ahead in my reply - what you said 
above would work fine.

thanks for clarifying my point better than I would have ;)

---
Bear

Build and Release Engineer
Open Source Applications Foundation (OSAF)
bear at osafoundation.org
http://www.osafoundation.org

bear at code-bear.com
http://code-bear.com

PGP Fingerprint = 9996 719F 973D B11B E111  D770 9331 E822 40B3 CD29


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/chandler-dev/attachments/20060901/a40959eb/PGP.pgp