Hi, I just wanted to point out a couple small corrections to an otherwise good summary of the situation.
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Erik Bernoth <erik.bern...@gmail.com> wrote: > distutils (classic) - the old school, deprecated, pretty much unmaintained > packaging tooling; still the official standard [4] (Note: reasons [13]) distutils isn't deprecated--almost all of the other mentioned projects rely on distutils on some level, though there seems to be some effort to undo that reliance and relegate distutils to just a build tool that can be swapped out for others. The problem with distutils is not so much that it's deprecated, as that there are so many other projects built on top of it, many of them making use of poorly documented internal interfaces, that it's very very difficult to change or improve distutils without breaking lots of other projects. > setuptools - fork of distutils, which wasn't maintained for a long time but > will now be merged with it's successor [8]. Setuptools is not a fork of distutils. It's one of the aforementioned products built on top of distutils that are very volatile to changes in distutils. Much of the functionality of setuptools is based on subclasses of some of the class interfaces in distutils. But it would not be accurate to describe it as a fork. (distribute however *is* a fork of setuptools). Thanks, Erik _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
