Why site-packages?
Dan Stromberg
drsalists at gmail.com
Tue Jul 3 16:40:57 EDT 2012
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Tue Jul 3 16:40:57 EDT 2012
- Previous message (by thread): Best data structure for DFS on large graphs
- Next message (by thread): Why site-packages?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Why is it that so much 3rd party python code gets installed to site-packages? Even for things that are almost certainly going to be used by a single application? Even for things you might only use once? Even for things that might require one version for one app, and another version for another app? Why not stash an application's python modules in /usr/local/lib/[appname], and stash a little frontend in /usr/local/bin that adds /usr/local/lib/[appname] to sys.path? Here's a thread on stackoverflow today asking why python starts up so slowly, and making it clear that this is because so much stuff ends up in site-packages: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11318028/is-it-safe-to-use-pythons-s-option The response "Because that's where things are supposed to go" makes me ask "Who made this decision and why?" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20120703/c387a3bc/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): Best data structure for DFS on large graphs
- Next message (by thread): Why site-packages?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list