On Jul 12, 2013, at 1:28 PM, Vinay Sajip <vinay_sa...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Daniel Holth <dholth <at> gmail.com> writes: > >> Getting rid of an executable build script is no longer a goal. Builds >> inherently need that often. But we don't want people extending distutils >> against their will. > > Perhaps I should have been clearer - I meant "executable setup.py install", > and as I understand it, it is a goal to get rid of that. Yes it's a goal to get rid of setup.py install, but I doubt it will ever fully be gone. At least not for a long time. There's almost 150k source dist packages on PyPI and I'm going to assume the vast bulk of them have a setup.py. > > Regarding "executable setup.py build", that's less of an issue than for > installing, but IIUC, it is still not ideal. Many of the hacks that people > have made around distutils/setuptools relate to building, not just > installing, or am I wrong? It's not ideal, but it's also largely only an issue on the machine of the developer who is packaging the software. If they are fine with the hacks then there's not a major reason to move them away from that. > > Regards, > > Vinay Sajip > > _______________________________________________ > Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig ----------------- Donald Stufft PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
