Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531648 --- Comment #4 from Andrew McNabb <amcnabb@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-10-29 14:51:07 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) > It already installs a /usr/bin/easy_install-3.1 > > It's not clear to me if we need an easy_install-3; we could rename it to that, > or drop it. I think it would be good to have an easy_install-3, so that there's more continuity with upgrades from 3.1 to 3.2 to 3.3, etc., but that's just my opinion. > I also used __python in order to override the standard python fragments for > getting sitearch/sitelib for setup, build and install. One of my aims is to > minimize the diff against the original specfile. I would think that the goal would be more to set the standard for Python 3 packaging, especially since there aren't any packaging guidelines yet. Not that I know what the right thing is. :) > > 3) The python_sitelib stuff looks a bit hackish, but there might not be any > > better way to do it. > What do you see as hackish about it? I'm trying to follow the changes > proposed here: Sorry, I was totally wrong on that. Thanks for the links. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review