[PEAK] Changing installation location (was re: PEAK CVS vs. ZODB CVS :: [pP]ersistence :: Round 1, Fight!)

[Ulrich Eck]

> Actually, this looks pretty cool.  The only downside I see is that existing
> installations of PEAK (or packages installed by PEAK) would need to be
> completely cleaned out first.  Otherwise, the old versions will live on in
> site-packages, which would be come before the .pth in the file.
>

not a problem for me

> But, the cool thing is that it would in future be *trivial* to remove or
> update a PEAK installation.  And, it would make it possible to have PEAK
> co-exist with a Zope X3 installation with minimal weirdness.  For example,
> I could have PEAK *always* install ZConfig and persistence, since the Zope
> ones would get used if Zope is installed to site-packages.
>

and it would ease the creation of debian packages, because debian does not 
allow to overwrite an already installed lib e.g. kjbuckets while installing a
new package.

> What does everybody else think?  Can you live with doing a one-time
> deletion of your existing ZConfig, peak, datetime, csv, fcgiapp, kjbuckets,
> and protocols packages/modules, in order for future installs to have
> everything bundled in a single directory?  Should I make this change to
> PyProtocols as well?

i like the idea for peak. 
for pyprotocols i would use the common way of installing a package,
cause i think it's audience is much wider than peak's. a "suspicious, 
undocumented" way of installing would imho not help pyprotocols to get 
popular.

Ulrich
-------------------------------

Ulrich Eck
net-labs Systemhaus GmbH
CEO & Code-Artist
Ebersberger Str. 46
85570 Markt Schwaben - Germany

eMail: ueck <at> net-labs.de
phone: +49 8121 4747 10
fax:   +49 8121 4747 77