Add packaging.

[ghost]

Package the sucker.

[bogdanm]

+1 from me, but let's wait from @screamerbg, he might have a different view on this.

[0xc0170]

+1 for having this as a python module, I was going to request this.

However, if we go this way, we should consider a proper name (using at least prefix, or some more unique name for now). A reason - https://pypi.python.org/pypi/neo/0.3.3 ).

[ghost]

mbed-neo ? I'm agnostic, suggestions?

[c1728p9]

Would it be possible to merge this patch as is and rename it later? Being able to install and use from anywhere would be very useful

[bogdanm]

I don't think so. I was told that the name "neo" needs to change, so probably merging this as-is doesn't look like a good option.

[sg-]

We'll need to test aliasing against other tools but mbed-cli in pypi and mbed as an alias may work.
screamerbg@aa98207

For the record, I don't like pypi for distributing packages and think we need OS specific executable builds.

[ghost]

On 18 Apr 2016, at 23:30, Sam Grove [email protected] wrote:

We'll need to test aliasing against other tools but mbed-cli in pypi and mbed as an alias may work.
screamerbg/neo@aa98207

For the record, I don't like pypi for distributing packages and think we need OS specific executable builds.

Providing the packaging allows distribution by pypi and it also makes the package easily deployable to a virtualenv (orthogonal to the use of pypi).

OS specific executable builds can coexist with this packaging.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.