David Lyon wrote: > > I can see your intentions here are good. But what you are suggesting is > just overly complicated for what is required. There's no need for a > templating engine, in this part of distutils. >
Compared to other parts of distutils, that's very simple, and actually useful and well established practice. > Yes, introducing a template engine might be good for multi-platform > output. > > But the setup.py and setup.cfg and [setup] sections must be readily > understood by the complete novice. That's the point that you don't > seem to understand yet. Stop making it non-obvious. > having if/then don't make distutils more complicated. The point of those 'dynamic' features in the static metadata is that a vast majority of projects can be *fully* described without a setup.py file - without it, very few packages would fall in that category. Once you can describe a non trivial subset of all python packages with a static metadata file, it means you can use it without using distutils itself, which is a very big plus. > No installation system I have ever heard of makes it mandatory > to understand a template system to be able to write your "hello > world - I'm installed".... script.. > Actually, almost every one I have ever seen does. Which installation system does not use a templating engine of some sort ? That's a very common practice. cheers, David _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
