On 16 July 2013 22:41, Vinay Sajip <vinay_sa...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > If the PEP is updated to include the exports, they should be in the wheel > no > matter which tool builds it. Then in theory distlib could generate the > scripts during installation, but there are a lot of options to consider - > did setuptools put them in there already? Do we want native launchers? etc. > which is perfectly doable in distlib, but I'm not sure that's the best > place > for it because I think wheel processing should be uncomplicated. > Wheel.install already has quite a few kwargs: >
I really don't want the wrappers to be present in the wheel, because if they are the wheel becomes architecture-specific. Also, consider that Unix targets should have the actual scripts written with no extension, whereas Windows targets should have foo-script.py and foo.exe. That should be decided at install time, bot at wheel creation time. As regards version-specific scripts, I'd assume it's the project's job to specify precisely what scripts they want. On that one, I'm on the side of providing infrastructure, not setting policy. Although I could be persuaded otherwise if there was a PEP on what commands a distribution should provide. In that case, let the project provide the command names, and let the installer implement the standard versioned-executable policy. Paul.
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig