Re: [Python-Dev] Request for Pronouncement: PEP 441 - Improving Python ZIP Application Support

2015年2月25日 02:02:32 -0800

On 24 February 2015 at 18:58, Guido van Rossum <[email protected]> wrote:
> The naming of the functions feels inconsistent -- maybe pack(directory,
> target) -> create_archive(directory, archive), and set_interpreter() ->
> copy_archive(archive, new_archive)?
One possible source of confusion with copy_archive (and its command
line equivalent "python -m zipapp old.pyz -o new.pyz") is that it
isn't technically a copy, as it changes the shebang line (if you omit
the interpreter argument it removes the existing shebang). We could
change it to copy by default, but (a) that's redundant as a file copy
works better, and (b) we'd need to add a method of specifying "remove
the shebang" to replace omitting the interpreter arg.
Is this a big enough issue to be worth changing the name of the
function and the command line behaviour? I'm inclined to leave it, but
mainly on the basis that I feel like I'm getting to the point of
over-thinking things...
Paul
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to