Éric Araujo added the comment:
This is handled by setuptools/pip. It cannot be converted to a distutils
feature request, as distutils does not handle dependencies.
--
resolution: - out of date
stage: needs patch - committed/rejected
status: open - closed
Alex Grönholm alex.gronholm+pyt...@nextday.fi added the comment:
Python 3.3 is entering beta soon. The develop command is a must have,
especially now that virtualenv is part of the official Python distribution. Can
someone summarize what still needs to be done to get this feature merged?
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
Merged yesterday and created this patch. Will refresh my memories by reading
all messages again and review.
--
dependencies: -Add **kwargs to reinitialize_command
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file24660/fe817128d2fc.diff
Changes by chris ch...@emerge-life.de:
--
nosy: +chris
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Changes by David Barnett davidbarne...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +mu_mind
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
___
Python-bugs-list
higery shoulderhig...@gmail.com added the comment:
What’s more practical for you, a review or a patch?
I think a review is better(thanks for your time:) ), because some changes maybe
needed after I have finished all the issues against the develop command.
--
Changes by higery shoulderhig...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file23387/adb2cb19ca9b.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
Thanks for the updated patch. There are things that should be removed (for
example functions like get_develop_method, given that we only support
packaging-based projects), and there are a few things to clean up in the tests.
What’s more
higery shoulderhig...@gmail.com added the comment:
higery, can you give us a status update? Do you have the time to ...
Sorry to reply to you so late, I will read carefully these reviews asap and try
to make an updated patch before 12th.
--
___
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
higery, can you give us a status update? Do you have the time to address
current reviews or would you like me to make an updated patch? I’d like to
incorporate this command as soon as possible to let people play with it, and
then we’ll see
Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file23009/5359c895f841.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
Changes by higery shoulderhig...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22932/af7d14ff129b.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
higery shoulderhig...@gmail.com added the comment:
Through discussing inside or outside the mailing list on this bug tracker,
current 'develop' has been made a kind of command other than an action. But
there still isn't a consensus of the concrete implemention way, so I keep this
command name
Alexis Metaireau ale...@notmyidea.org added the comment:
_run_setuptools_install is only intended to support setuptools setup.py,
converting .egg-info to .dist-info, internally. IMO, you should not care about
the differences between setuptools/distutils1/setuptools at this level, as it
should
Alexis Metaireau ale...@notmyidea.org added the comment:
IOW, in my opinion, support for setuptools develop command is not needed in
packaging core, and still be taken care directly be the users wanting to run
python setup.py develop: I don't see any reason to make it avaible on the
stdlib.
higery shoulderhig...@gmail.com added the comment:
Alexis Metaireau ale...@notmyidea.org added the comment:
I'm not sure why you're talking about it in the context of develop, can you
clarify this?
My consideration is : if in Packaging we always convert .egg-info directory to
.dist-info
Alexis Metaireau ale...@notmyidea.org added the comment:
Yep, packaging is not keeping the .egginfo directories, or at least does not
plan to keep them (It should be the case currently but I haven't checked
recently) in the upcoming release, so I would go on removing support for
setuptools'
higery shoulderhig...@gmail.com added the comment:
IOW, in my opinion, support for setuptools develop command is not needed in
packaging core
Then do you also mean support that for setuptools install is also not necessary
in packaging core?
and still be taken care directly be the users
Alexis Metaireau ale...@notmyidea.org added the comment:
On 08/18/2011 05:54 PM, higery wrote:
Then do you also mean support that for setuptools install is also not
necessary in packaging core?
setuptools install is only supported in packaging because it's a widely
used thing, and many
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
[...] so I keep this command name as 'develop' and the simple usage
of this command is :
pysetup run develop
So far, so good.
BTW, most developers in this list have agreed that 'develop' is a
kind of install command, so I also add an entry
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
Great. I’ve been re-reading some old threads in the spirit of “pth files are
evil”, so I wondered whether we could/should avoid them, but I think the
criticism was directed against pth files edited after the initial installation,
and pth files
Carl Meyer c...@dirtcircle.com added the comment:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
[Carl]
there's an implicit assumption that a .pth file is the most likely
strategy.
If you have other ideas, please share them.
No, I think
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
[Carl]
there's an implicit assumption that a .pth file is the most likely
strategy.
If you have other ideas, please share them.
[another message]
I don't see why the installation-location-finding for develop should
be any different than for a
higery shoulderhig...@gmail.com added the comment:
** After the package has been installed in-place (using the develop
command), how does one identify it as an in development project (or in
development mode)? -- Case 3 and 6 touch on this topic (case 3 is a little
vague at this time), but
Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file22628/unnamed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
For now, you should not worry about pkg_resources. Write a simple
pure-packaging implementation compatible with packaging; the setuptools and
distribute developers will see if they want to add forward compatibility with
our system.
--
higery shoulderhig...@gmail.com added the comment:
2011/7/12 Michael Mulich rep...@bugs.python.org
Michael Mulich michael.mul...@gmail.com added the comment:
The wiki page has been edited to note what the develop command will
write to the file system. I'll restate it here as well...
The
Changes by higery shoulderhig...@gmail.com:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file22630/unnamed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
Changes by higery shoulderhig...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22632/2750cd9e2111.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file22614/b1b9da3b3d20.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
Michael Mulich michael.mul...@gmail.com added the comment:
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 9:39 AM, higery rep...@bugs.python.org wrote:
The develop command writes three pieces of information to the filesystem:
1. It calls upon the build action(s) to build the package relative to
the package's root
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
Oh, I just realized that one thing I insisted on was wrong.
I pushed for the modules to be built in the build dir, as well as the dist-info
dir, so that the build dir can be added to sys.path to let both import and
packaging.database find the
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
Ah, higery’s code already has an answer for me: it writes *two* paths in the
.pth file, one to the build dir (so that .dist-info is found) and one to the
modules root (for modules, built in place). Anyone sees a problem with that?
(For
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
I’ve reviewed the last patch. It looks like the code only installs to the
global site-packages, and there is no support to install to the user
site-packages or to another arbitrary location.
On Windows, normal users seem to be able to write to
Carl Meyer c...@dirtcircle.com added the comment:
Ah, higery’s code already has an answer for me: it writes *two* paths in the
.pth file, one to the build dir (so that .dist-info is found) and one to the
modules root (for modules, built in place). Anyone sees a problem with that?
(For
Carl Meyer c...@dirtcircle.com added the comment:
I’ve reviewed the last patch. It looks like the code only installs
to the global site-packages, and there is no support to install to
the user site-packages or to another arbitrary location.
On Windows, normal users seem to be able to
Michael Mulich michael.mul...@gmail.com added the comment:
After looking over the use cases, these are my findings and questions:
* Cases 2, 3, 5 and 6 are strongly related. I'd suggest you condense them into
a single use case. I agree with case 2 and 6 most, but have questions:
** Why
Carl Meyer c...@dirtcircle.com added the comment:
Can someone post a link here to the page of use cases that Michael just
reviewed? I think the link came through on the Fellowship mailing list, but I'm
not quickly finding it...
--
___
Python
Alexis Metaireau ale...@notmyidea.org added the comment:
Carl, I believe that's this one: http://wiki.python.org/moin/UsecasesOfDevelop
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
Carl Meyer c...@dirtcircle.com added the comment:
On 07/11/2011 09:17 AM, Michael Mulich wrote:
* Cases 2, 3, 5 and 6 are strongly related. I'd suggest you condense them
into a single use case. I agree with case 2 and 6 most, but have questions:
** Why wouldn't one simply use a virtualenv?
Michael Mulich michael.mul...@gmail.com added the comment:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Carl Meyer rep...@bugs.python.org wrote:
* Cases 2, 3, 5 and 6 are strongly related.
I don't know. I don't consider case 3 useful, because I don't consider
I don't want to use a virtualenv (without
Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22614/b1b9da3b3d20.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
Higery asked me why I recommended/asked that the .dist-info directory should be
built in the build directory: “don't you feel it's a bit strange because we
actually don't build the source except for some .c/.cpp files, but create a
build
Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:
--
hgrepos: +29
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:
--
keywords: +patch
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22377/aa68d35988bb.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
Peter Waller peter.wal...@gmail.com added the comment:
Hi - Great to see this functionality coming. There is one feature of it that I
would really like to see fixed, which is currently broken in
setuptools/distribute - I'm sorry if this is the wrong forum for this note, but
I wanted to add it
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
Yes, this should of course be supported.
Note that in packaging, packages_dir has been simplified to packages_root,
which means that all modules and packages must be in the same directory.
--
___
Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:
--
dependencies: +Add **kwargs to get_reinitialized_command
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
Changes by Peter Waller peter.wal...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +Peter.Waller
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Changes by Michael Mulich michael.mul...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +michael.mulich
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8668
___
___
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
FTR, Xu Dehai (higery) is working on this for GSoC. We discussed the
requirements on the mailing list:
http://groups.google.com/group/the-fellowship-of-the-packaging/browse_thread/thread/ae196efc4956b9e2
This message in particular defines
Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:
--
assignee: tarek - eric.araujo
keywords: +gsoc
title: add a 'develop' command - Packaging: add a 'develop' command
versions: +Python 3.3 -3rd party
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
52 matches
Mail list logo
