Antoine Pitrou <solipsis <at> pitrou.net> writes: > > Hi, > > Paul Moore <p.f.moore <at> gmail.com> writes: > > > > On 3 September 2013 22:20, M.-A. Lemburg <mal <at> egenix.com> wrote: > > IMO, a much better way forward would be to integrate useful setuptools > > changes right back into distutils, so that the monkey patching > > no longer happens and python-dev can officially bless those > > set of changes. > > > > I'm curious about this possibility. > > It seems everyone has the memory of a goldfish here? > Reintegrating useful third-party features, and generally improving > distutils, was Tarek's original work on distutils, then distutils2 / > packaging. > > (Yes, it's a pity it was shot down, since all we are left now are > pie-in-the sky improvements that may happen 5 years down the road > for the average user)
Note I'm not *criticizing* those pie-in-the-sky improvements. There's no false dilemma here. But the interim solution of gradual improvements would have been very beneficial everyone (including the developers of long-term changes, since that would spare them the complaints about the lack of short-term improvements :-)). Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
