Closed rubik closed 13 years ago
About the name, why not just .zip ? A file containing a folder with package's name, itself containing two files:
Yes! I overcomplicated things, .zip is just right!
Only one more thing, it is not clear to me what run.py
should contain. How do we know what to run?
Just clone https://github.com/fdev31/zicbee-workshop and run "manage" code, most interesting is: https://github.com/fdev31/zicbee-workshop/blob/master/_genexecutables.py which is a base... For the paths to look for the ".egg" we may discuss... We could also make a run command that could rewrite itself this way:
./run.py --pkg-egg ~/myapps/myprogram.egg
and even
./run.py --pkg-install
:)
I could have fun writing the launcher & his generator but I'm little out of time right now :P If you get a working egg generation that could replace mine I'll eventually dive into it :)
Thank you for the links, I didn't see that there was _genexecutable.py
too! :)
pyg.pack.Packer actually works well, only launcher generation is missing! We could just add to sys.path
our egg. The zipimport module is included in stdlib from version 2.3, it wouldn't be difficult.
First bug ;)
% python pyg/pack.py zicbee-lib
zicbee-lib:
Retrieving data for zicbee-lib [100% - 22.1 Kb / 22.1 Kb]
Writing data into zicbee-lib-0.7.3.tar.gz
zicbee-lib downloaded successfully
Looking for zicbee-lib dependencies
Finished processing dependencies
Adding packages to the bundle
But zicbee-lib does not have a requires.txt file! :)
Because It has no requirement :P
LOL so what is the bug? XD
I've just realized that entry_points is formatted wrongly and spec/depend has a wrong version. I'll fix that now.
OOps double commit is due to the automatic merge...
If I need some kind of advanced configuration (to help the creation of the .py file or to auto-remove files from the archive for instance) would you recommend sticking to .ini format or is it possible to ask the user for values and/or propose an alternative configuration file ?
So, if we decided to postpone advanced features to next release, I think I can close this issue and open a new one later.
Just set the feat. For the release after... It's not working yet...
Le 14 juil. 2011 20:34, "rubik" < reply@reply.github.com> a crit :
So, if we decided to postpone advanced features to next release, I think I can close this issue.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rubik/pyg/issues/90#issuecomment-1573896
So I'll open a new issue...
Pyg should be able to create Packs... (See #85)