[petsc-dev] [petsc-maint #80119] Re: make install broken on unix?

[Matthew Knepley]

On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Sean Farley <sean at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

> I disagree with this completely.  There's a tendency to think of everything
>> python as a package -- this is NOT a package.  It has no __init__.py, it has
>> no __all__, it has no submodules, and it doesn't need any of that.  It
>> simply does a one-off task -- it's bits of code to be used in a script.
>>  Putting this sort of code in site-packages is what makes site-packages the
>> nightmare of ignored dependencies and overlapping versions it is today.
>>
>> If you want to make it into a package, you're welcome to do so.  With that
>> includes registration with the cheeseshop to make sure the namespace is
>> unique, placing the single file within a folder that includes an __init__
>> (and then likely just gets imported within that __init__), writing a
>> setup.py, etc etc.  It's just complete overkill.
>
>
> Then why put it in bin/python at all? Just drop the .py extension and put
> it in bin (with a 'correct' [whatever that may be] python hashbang)?
>

I am for this, although I do not give a crap what the extension is.

   Matt


> Sean
>



-- 
What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments
is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments
lead.
-- Norbert Wiener
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20110725/6ce3acda/attachment.html>