Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> writes: > 1. (Meta-requirement) I want to be able to download a Windows > installer[1] for *every* package I need.
I presume, by “meta-requirement”, you're showing awareness that this is something very much dependent on motivating people to actually create those installers for each and every package. > 1a. This means that the barrier for packagers building Windows > installers should be as low as possible. This, too, is dependent in part on motivating people to actually get an environment capable of producing such installers. The selection of metadata in PYthon packages is only one, IMO relatively minor, input to that. > 1b. It also means that other formats (e.g. eggs) should offer no > benefit over Windows installers I can't see how this is reasonable at all. Windows installers are inherently outside the bounds of free-software developers to improve; yet your requirement is that no alternative be allowed to do better? I hope I'm misunderstanding your requirement and that you've got something more reasonable in mind. > 2. For pure Python extensions, I can take a "standard" source > tarball[3] and simply run the "standard" distutils command to build a > Windows installer. > 2a. I can do this on any machine, even if it has no network connection > (obviously I'd get the source tarball on disk or equivalent in that > case). Does “any machine” include those without MSI-creation tools? I imagine (but would love to know otherwise) that the creation of an MSI package cannot be done on any arbitrary Windows machine, but needs special (external to distutils) programs and/or libraries installed first. -- \ “Instead of a trap door, what about a trap window? The guy | `\ looks out it, and if he leans too far, he falls out. Wait. I | _o__) guess that's like a regular window.” —Jack Handey | Ben Finney _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
