Message 342358 - Python tracker

Message342358

Author	methane
Recipients	SilentGhost, methane, ncoghlan, vstinner, vx1920
Date	2019-05-13.16:48:22
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<CAEfz+Tx52XopdKonHgC8fqRFdaVMLqu-jQ7TKLodLx_RObUy8Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to	<CACptoiB48o1Xs8hOofD-KEFxB1CXqvX=yRv6zy1_Wz=SVNjO_w@mail.gmail.com>

Content
> vx1920 <vx1920@gmail.com> added the comment: > > "sitevendor" is required because "sitecustomize" already "taken": imagine > organization XYZ , they install Python/Anaconda for workers in XYZ. Admin > in XYZ places some XYZ-specific code into "sitecustomize". I don't think it's common situation. If distribution want to add such "admin"-customization, distributors can implement such additional customization in sitecustomize.py, or even in site.py. For example, Ubuntu uses customized site.py and sitecustomize.py. Is there some discussion in Anaconda developers about proposing "sitevendor" is upstream (CPython)? Or is it just your idea?

Content

> vx1920 <vx1920@gmail.com> added the comment:
>
> "sitevendor" is required because "sitecustomize" already "taken": imagine
> organization XYZ , they install Python/Anaconda for workers in XYZ. Admin
> in XYZ places some XYZ-specific code into "sitecustomize".

I don't think it's common situation.
If distribution want to add such "admin"-customization, distributors can
implement such additional customization in sitecustomize.py, or even in site.py.

For example, Ubuntu uses customized site.py and sitecustomize.py.

Is there some discussion in Anaconda developers about proposing "sitevendor"
is upstream (CPython)?  Or is it just your idea?

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2019-05-13 16:48:22	methane	set	recipients: + methane, ncoghlan, vstinner, SilentGhost, vx1920
2019-05-13 16:48:22	methane	link	issue36891 messages
2019-05-13 16:48:22	methane	create