On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 4:09 AM, Lennart Regebro <rege...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Setuptools non-support for Python 3 is currently a serious hindrance > towards Python 3 aceptance. I'm trying to figure out what to do as a > next step in the Python 3 support for setuptools. And I have > encountered some obstacles. The first one is that setuptools requires > itself for installing and running tests. That makes it hard to install > it under Python 3. There are various solutions to this, but the next > obstacle I encounter in choosing the right solution is that the code > is hard to understand, and it makes me want to just rip it out and > start over, or in even more frustrated moments, avoid the problems by > not using setuptools at all. But the third obstacle for that is that I > don't actually know what features of setuptools people use. > > I personally use setuptools for these reasons: > > 1. When I create projects with paster, it uses setuptools. Of course if you create a project template that uses distutils, then that's what you'll get... just happens no one does that with paster templates. > > 2. Setuptools makes it possible to specify requirements, which is then > used by buildout. In pip at least it does this with *.egg-info/install_requires.txt, but in easy_install and I'm guessing buildout it's using the pkg_resources.Distribution object. > > 3. Namespace packages require pkg_resources? There's a way of doing it with pkgutils, but in some way that I don't understand, pkg_resources does it better. > > 4. The test command. > > What are the other major reasons people use setuptools? > Entry points are the big one for me. There is some other metadata that I use from time to time, but I'm sure I could work around it. Of course there's the specific things pip uses as noted in a previous email. -- Ian Bicking | http://blog.ianbicking.org
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
