[Python-Dev] Status of the built-in virtualenv functionality in 3.3 (original) (raw)
Éric Araujo merwok at netwok.org
Thu Oct 6 17:46:27 CEST 2011
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Status of the built-in virtualenv functionality in 3.3
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Status of the built-in virtualenv functionality in 3.3
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Le 06/10/2011 17:31, Barry Warsaw a écrit :
I agree we can't use virtualenv, and shouldn't use virtualize. I'm afraid that picking something cute might make it harder to discover.
pythonvorcpythonvseem like good choices to me. Maybe the former, so we could potentially have jythonv, etc.
I’m not sure we would. The feature is two-fold:
- changes to getpath.c, site.py and other usual suspects so that CPython supports being run in an isolated environment;
- a new module used to create isolated environments.
The first part is implemented in CPython; the second part needs a module name to replace virtualenv. python -m pythonv doesn’t seem right.
python -m makeenv? python -m workon? (idea from virtualenvwrapper) python -m nest?
Cheers
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Status of the built-in virtualenv functionality in 3.3
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Status of the built-in virtualenv functionality in 3.3
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]