Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan <at> gmail.com> writes: > I'm not a fan of post-install hooks - that way lies setup.py. If > people want to run arbitrary code at install time, they can publish a > platform specific installer. > > *Maybe* we can go down that path in the Python 3.5 timeframe, but for now, no.
I'm concerned that this might affect adoption: there are a lot of projects that have non-trivial custom code in setup.py - often doing mundane stuff like copying files around before the actual setup() call. Having hooks will enable easier migration for such projects (which include, for example, Twisted, Cython, NumPy). I don't believe it's realistic to expect them all to create platform-specific installers; they'll just carry on using setuptools/distribute. If we want to move things forward in packaging, surely we have to make migration easier? IMO this was one of the things that distutils2/packaging also did not address sufficiently. Just to clarify: when I say "hooks", what I mean is "setuptools-style entry points that the installer looks for, which are used to customise the installation process". I believe it is possible to provide limited extensibility using hooks without it leading to the complete ad-hocery that setup.py entails. Regards, Vinay Sajip _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
