Author Andi Bergmeier
Recipients Andi Bergmeier, paul.moore, r.david.murray, steve.dower, tim.golden, zach.ware
Date 2017-02-09.08:46:14
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1486629975.44.0.983183623747.issue29503@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
I am not the primary contributor to Bazel, so the decision to support embeddable Python is not mine to make.

That said, it seems to me like embeddable Python is a perfect fit if you want to have a hermetic Python installation. And I AM actually the person advocating for support for embeddable Python :).

We should discuss whether we use -c or a wrapper script. The latter might be the better option on the long run for other reasons, too.

My original question stems from the desire to only use e.g. a wrapper script for embeddable for the near future. Reason being that it is not yet as well tested as the PYTHONPATH approach. So would be hesitant to switch from PYTHONPATH to wrapper script for all variants. Also I am not sure yet, the wrapper script is an option for all cases.

Thanks for the input.
History
Date User Action Args
2017-02-09 08:46:15Andi Bergmeiersetrecipients: + Andi Bergmeier, paul.moore, tim.golden, r.david.murray, zach.ware, steve.dower
2017-02-09 08:46:15Andi Bergmeiersetmessageid: <1486629975.44.0.983183623747.issue29503@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2017-02-09 08:46:15Andi Bergmeierlinkissue29503 messages
2017-02-09 08:46:14Andi Bergmeiercreate