# Should there be a new standard for installing arbitrary data files?

**URL:** <https://discuss.python.org/t/should-there-be-a-new-standard-for-installing-arbitrary-data-files/7853>\
**Category:** Packaging\
**Created:** [March 23, 2021, 3:53pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/should-there-be-a-new-standard-for-installing-arbitrary-data-files/7853 "2021-03-23T15:53:59Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 91

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dholth](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/dholth/32/952_2.png) [@dholth](https://discuss.python.org/u/dholth)\
**Post date:** [August 2, 2021, 9:27pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/should-there-be-a-new-standard-for-installing-arbitrary-data-files/7853/91 "2021-08-02T21:27:05Z")

</div>

This discussion has included the fact that the `data` directory in wheel’s `package-1.0.data/data/` is only there because there was a same-named category in distutils. The category named `data` is not “a useful place to put your data” because, by mistake, virtualenv and non-virtualenv installations place those files in different locations.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.python.org/t/should-there-be-a-new-standard-for-installing-arbitrary-data-files/7853)._