Discussion of Webware for Python including feedback and proposals.
Sophana schrieb:
> I'm using webware and am very happy with it.
> However, I think webware packaging should be "more standard"
> I think it becomes necessary to have easyinstall, rpm or debian packages
> of webware
Webware is really old, started in the pre Python 2.0 ages which had not
even a distutils package. So Webware invented a lot of the stuff itself
we now take for granted, e.g. its own plugin-system. You're right, this
is now an anachronism. I'm planning to make Webware more standard which
involves some drastic changes. I wanted to start a discussion about this
after Webware 1.0 is out. This must happen in a new version branch.
> The same for webware applications, the application context is not
> packageable, as it has direct pathnames to the webware installation.
> What about compatibility between applications and webware versions...
Since version 0.9 or so, there are no absolute pathnames in Webware
working dirs any more, except one single pointer to the Webware
installation itself, so you can freely move an copy them.
Concerning compatibility, the 1.0 branch will be stable and maintained
with bugfixes for a very long time.
-- Christoph
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Webware-discuss mailing list
Webware-discuss@???
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss
