Re: Eggs, VirtualEnv, and Apt - best practices?
- From: Fredrik Lundh <fredrik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 22:15:50 +0200
Dmitry S. Makovey wrote:
you have just described OS package building ;)
I can't speak for everybody, but supporting multiple platforms (PHP, Perl,
Python, Java) we found that the only way to stay consistent is to use OS
native packaging tools (in your case apt and .deb ) and if you're missing
something - roll your own package. After a while you accumulate plenty of
templates to chose from when you need yet-another-library not available
upstream in your preferred package format. Remember that some python tools
might depend on non-python packages, so the only way to make sure all that
is consistent across environment - use unified package management.
you're speaking for lots of organizations, at least.
rpm/debs from supplier's repository
subversion (or equivalent) -> locally built rpm/debs
+ organization's favourite deployment tools
---------------------------------
deployed application
</F>
.
- References:
- Eggs, VirtualEnv, and Apt - best practices?
- From: Scott Sharkey
- Re: Eggs, VirtualEnv, and Apt - best practices?
- From: Dmitry S. Makovey
- Eggs, VirtualEnv, and Apt - best practices?
- Prev by Date: Re: PEP Proposal
- Next by Date: Re: Eggs, VirtualEnv, and Apt - best practices?
- Previous by thread: Re: Eggs, VirtualEnv, and Apt - best practices?
- Next by thread: Re: Eggs, VirtualEnv, and Apt - best practices?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|