Paul Moore's latest update

pep-0250.txt

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Status: Draft
 Type: Standards Track
 Created: 2001-03-30
 Python-Version: 2.2
-Post-History:
+Post-History: 30-Mar-2001
 
 
 Abstract
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ Implementation
     A suitable change would be to simply replace the last 4 lines with
 
         else:
-            sitedirs == [makepath(prefix, "lib", "site-packages")]
+            sitedirs == [prefix, makepath(prefix, "lib", "site-packages")]
 
     Changes would also be required to distutils, in the sysconfig.py
     file.  It is worth noting that this file does not seem to have
@@ -79,19 +79,42 @@ Implementation
 
 Notes
 
-    1. It would be better if this change could be included in Python
+    - This change does not preclude packages using the current
-       2.1, as changing something of this nature is better done
+      location -- the change only adds a directory to sys.path, it
-       sooner, rather than later, to reduce the backward-compatibility
+      does not remove anything.
-       burden. This is extremely unlikely to happen at this late stage
-       in the release cycle, however.
 
-    2. This change does not preclude packages using the current
+    - Both the current location (sys.prefix) and the new directory
-       location -- the change only adds a directory to sys.path, it
+      (site-packages) are included in sitedirs, so that .pth files
-       does not remove anything.
+      will be recognized in either location.
 
-    3. In the Windows distribution of Python 2.1 (beta 1), the
+    - This proposal adds a single additional site-packages directory
-       Lib\site-packages directory has been removed.  It would need to
+      to sitedirs. On Unix platforms, two directories are added, one
-       be reinstated.
+      for version-independent files (Python code) and one for
+      version-dependent code (C extensions). This is necessary on
+      Unix, as the sitedirs include a common (across Python versions)
+      package location, in /usr/local by default. As there is no such
+      common location available on Windows, there is also no need for
+      having two separate package directories.
+
+    - If users want to keep DLLs in a single location on Windows,
+      rather than keeping them in the package directory, the DLLs
+      subdirectory of the Python install directory is available for
+      that purpose. Adding an extra directory solely for DLLs should
+      not be necessary.
+
+
+Open Issues
+
+    - There have been no comments on this proposal from non-Windows
+      users. In the absence of such comments, it is assumed that there
+      will be no adverse effects on such platforms caused by the
+      proposed change. (The author knows of no reason why there should
+      be).
+
+    - There could be issues with applications which embed Python. To
+      the author's knowledge, there should be no problem as a result
+      of this change. Again, there have been no comments (supportive
+      or otherwise) from users who embed Python.
 
 
 Copyright