Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fixed setup.py, and updated version number #3

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mattrobenolt
Copy link
Contributor

Hey Kami, I just happened to notice that the actual setup.py for this was out of date, so I patched that up and cleaned some other miscellaneous things. I bumped it to version 0.2.0, and this package should be good for an update on pypi. I'd like to see the 2 year old version be updated. ;)

All tested with the following:
pip install -e git://github.com/mattrobenolt/cloudkick-py.git#egg=cloudkick

@Kami
Copy link
Member

Kami commented Jul 23, 2011

Hi, thanks for the patch.

I think there was an actual reason for renaming module from cloudkick to cloudkick_api (probably, because it's not backward compatible), but I can't remember it atm.

@diN0bot, can you remember it and do you think it's OK to merge this patch and publish a new version to pypi?

@mattrobenolt
Copy link
Contributor Author

If there's a reason for the rename, I'm alright supporting that. The setup package didn't coincide with any new naming convention, so I kept things the way they were.

As for backwards compatibility, I don't think anything has changed. When I wrote the RoleDefs class, my intention was allowing it to work as it did before, with added features. We don't have any unittests or regression tests to verify though. :(

@diN0bot
Copy link
Contributor

diN0bot commented Jan 14, 2012

@mattrobenolt @Kami Oops, I just saw this discussion.

Yes, the module was renamed from cloudkick to cloudkick_api because of a conflict with cloudkick's product module name.

Otherwise, LGTM.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants