On 19/03/2008, Jeff Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1. What is the plan for PyPI when Python 3.0 comes out and > dependencies start getting satisfied from distribution > across the great divide, e.g. a 3.0-specific package > pulls from PyPI a 2.x-specific package to meet some > need?
As distutils (and core Python) doesn't do any automatic dependency management, this is a setuptools issue. As such, it's up to setuptools to deal with it. There may be infrastructure changes that would be generally useful, but there's nothing *needed* for the core. > 2. There have been attempts over the years to fix distutils, > with the last one being in 2006 by Anthony Baxter. He > stated that a major hurdle was the strong demand to > respect backward compatibility and he finally gave up. > One of the purposes of Python 3.0 was the freedom to > break backward compatibility for the sake of "doing > the right thing". So is it now permissible to give > distutils a good reworking and stop letting > compatibility issues hold us back? Sounds reasonable. I'm sure patches would be considered, but past discussions around "including setuptools" have been controversial and generally not reached consensus (for reasons other than pure backward compatibility). Also, while compatibility isn't as important for 3.0, smooth migration *is* - so any incompatible proposal must include some consideration of how to assist people with huge, complex setup.py files which use distutils internals in complex ways. So be prepared to do some work :-) (But I'd be happy to see distutils improved. I just don't have any need for such improvement, personally). Paul. _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
