Fred Drake wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:26 PM, David Cournapeau > <da...@ar.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp> wrote: > >> You can't ban setup.py: although a lot of packages can rely on a purely >> declarative package description, some package won't be able to do so >> (unless your declarative thing ends up being a full language). >> > > Given the variety of special cases that have to be dealt with, we'll > always have to a way to build packages that use Python code for what > we're currently using setup.py for. > > For the many packages that don't need that level of flexibility, using > a tool that consumes static metadata is a major win, so long as we > keep in mind that tools need to be able to determine when that static > metadata is sufficient. That allows the development of tools that can > usefully get things done *and* refuse to run untrusted code > themselves. >
Maybe my English was lacking in my previous email, but that just described one of the main goal of something like toydist: fully describe in a declarative manner a large subset of python 'packages', and making it possible to interoperate/extend with other tools (for now, only distutils itself in toydist toy implementation, but I am more interested in interoperating with waf/scons in the short term, and other people would be more interested in buildout, paver, etc... depending on their needs). David _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
