Marcus Smith <qwcode <at> gmail.com> writes: > > > > I think it's still useful to have pip vendor just pkg_resources (as > pip.pkg_resources). It's easy, it gives you enough to install wheels, > and it's not the only thing you would do. > > I agree. there's 2 problems to be solved here > > 1) making pip a self-sufficient wheel installer (which requires some internal pkg_resources equivalent) > 2) removing the user headache of a setuptools build *dependency* for practically all current pypi distributions > > for #2, we have a few paths I think > > 1) bundle setuptools (and have pip install "pkg_resources" for console scripts, if it existed as a separate project) > 2) bundle setuptools (and rewrite the console script wrapper logic to not need pkg_resources?) > 3) dynamic install of setuptools from wheel when pip needs to instal sdists (which is 99.9% of the time, so this feels a bit silly) > 4) just be happy that the pip bootstrap/bundle efforts will alleviate the pain in new versions of python (by pre-installing setuptools?)
If setuptools changes the script generation, the need for pkg_resources is gone at least from that part of the picture. Perhaps you're forgetting that there already is an internal pkg_resources equivalent in my pip-distlib branch - this is a pkg_resources compatibility shim using pip.vendor.distlib which passed all the pip tests when it was submitted as a PR. Regards, Vinay Sajip _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
