I don't think there is a need to be that pessimistic. Most people will even be able to keep setup.py as is. But when you really should be sidestepping DistUtils instead of writing a 10k line extension there is a supported path. On Mar 21, 2014 7:37 PM, "Vinay Sajip" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > This strategy does not generally try to eliminate arbitrary code > > execution during builds - builds are an inherently arbitrary-code > > process. But once the build has happened most installs should work > > without arbitrary code execution. > > > I don't think builds should be a *completely* arbitrary-code process. I > understand well that user-defined code should be accommodated, but IMO this > should be within a declarative framework with well-defined hooks, otherwise > it will ultimately lead to the same problems that setup.py has. > > Regards, > > Vinay Sajip > >
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
