On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Tarek Ziadé <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Overall, I am curious to know what are your issues, if it not about > the building process and the definition of metadata. Without going into the technical details, it really boils down to separate the concerns of the different parts of a packaging solution, and having clear interface between them. For example, it is *possible* to integrate a new build system within distutils. I know this for a fact because I have done so (numpy and scipy can be entirely built with scons instead of distutils for the C/C++/Fortran extensions). But it was an awful experience. > I am just very skeptical that your issues are so different from the issues > we are working in distutils2. Yes, other people have stated this as well. On the other hand, what I am doing with bento "feels" obvious within the numpy/scipy community as far as I can tell. I think it mostly boils down to different backgrounds and different concerns. If you were building/developing complex C extensions daily, you would understand our issues much better from experience, and I guess I would understand better what distutils2 is about if I were doing web development. There is also a strong disagreement on how to do deployment - it has been stated that pypi current philosophy of not enforcing metadata policy will stay in place, whereas I am absolutely convinced it is the root of most pypi issues. On this, we will only ever be able to agree on disagreeing I am afraid. David _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
