The wheel installer does call setuptools to generate console script wrappers. On Apr 18, 2015 1:36 PM, "Paul Moore" <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18 April 2015 at 18:19, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal > <chris.bar...@noaa.gov> wrote: > > (your quote trimming's a bit over-enthusiastic, you lost the attribution > here) > > >> "python -m something" rather than just "something" isn't broken, it's > >> just an inconvenience. > > > > Tell that to a newbie. This is EXACTLY the kind of thing that should > > "just work". > > It's a huge "quality of implementation" issue, certainly - any > installer that doesn't include script generation built in is going to > be as annoying as hell to a user. But they do exist (wheel install, > for instance) and the resulting installation "works", even if a > newcomer would hate it. So it's not "mandatory" in the sense that no > functionality is lost. But this is a moot point, as PEP 459 says the > python.commands extension SHOULD be marked as required. And wheel > install would technically be in violation of PEP 426, as it doesn't > handle script wrappers and it doesn't fail when a package needs them > (only "technically", because PEP 426 isn't finalised yet, and "wheel > install" could be updated to support it). > > But I'd already said most of that - you just pulled that one point out > of context. > > Paul > _______________________________________________ > Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig >
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig