On 12:09 am, sstein...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 15, 2009, at 7:52 PM, David Lyon wrote:
And imo the discussion has gone way off track..
The use case isn't abstract. All this discussion is about trying
to rewrite two lines of code.
-- setup.py --
"""
if sys.platform == 'win32':
setup.dependencies.add('win32com','162')
setup()
"""
That would be the simplest way to do it in code.
It appears as if "if sys.platform == 'win32':"
is an evil line of code - that certain people
want to go to great lengths to stomp out.
It's one line of code for crying out loud...
We don't need a mini-language just because we
don't like writing it the shortest way...
talk about platform bias gone utterly crazy...
Assuming that it really is that simple...
+1 on everything above.
A 1 line change is much better than a 30 message debate, BNF diagram,
and DSL for a simple case. If it doesn't work out for some reason,
some _real_ reason, debate it then in context, if it ever comes up
again.
I don't think it's really this simple. The point is to have static
definition of the package information. Having a Python program define
this information at runtime does not satisfy this requirement. You can
say that the simple sys.platform test is not evil, but how does that
lead to a solution allowing PyPI to tell users what the dependencies for
a package are on their platform?
Still, it may be that if the only use case here is conditionally
declaring a dependency if the install target is Windows, a simpler
solution might suffice. I won't try to describe such a solution.
Instead, I'll ask if that premise seems valid.
What use cases do we have? There's the one described above, which lots
of people have been talking about. I think there's another one related
to target Python version - eg, on Python 2.3, depend on simplejson, but
on Python 2.6, don't. What else?
Jean-Paul
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
