On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 9:05 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 18 May 2015 07:32, "Chris Barker" <chris.bar...@noaa.gov> wrote: > > > > On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 12:05 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> > % pip install --upgrade pip > >> > % pip install some_conda_package > >> > >> This gets the respective role of the two tools reversed - it's like my > >> asking for "pip install some_fedora_rpm" to be made to work. > > > > > > I agree here -- I was thinking there was some promise in a > conda_package_to_wheel converter though. It would, of course, only work in > a subset of conda packages, but would be nice. > > > > The trick is that conda packages for the hard-to-build python packages > (the ones we care about) often (always?) depend on conda packages for > dynamic libs, and pip+wheel have no support for that. > > > > And this is a trick, because while I have some ideas for supporting > just-for-python dynamic libs, conda's are not just-for-python -- so that > might be hard to mash together. > > > > Continuum has a bunch of smart people, though. > > > >> However, having conda use "pip install" in its build scripts so that > >> it reliably generates pip compatible installation metadata would be a > >> possibility worth discussing - that's what we've started doing in > >> Fedora, so that runtime utilities like pkg_resources can work > >> correctly. > > > > > > Hmm -- that's something ot look into -- you can put essentially anything > into a conda bulid script -- so this would be a matter of convention, > rather than tooling. (of course the conventions used by Continuum for the > "offical" conda packages is the standard). > > > > But I'm confused as to the roles of pip vs setuptools, vs wheel, vs ??? > > > > I see pip has handling the dependency resolution, and finding and > downloading of packages part of the problem -- conda does those already. > > > > So what would using pip inside a conda build script buy you that using > setuptools does not? > > Indirection via pip injects the usage of setuptools even for plain > distutils projects, and generates > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0376/ compliant metadata by default. > Note that some packages will push hard against injecting setuptools, at least until it does not offer a way to prevent from installing as an egg directory. Most of the core scientific packages avoid setuptools because of this. David However, looking at the current packaging policy, I think I misremembered > the situation - it looks like we *discussed* recommending indirection via > pip & attaining PEP 376 compliance, but haven't actually moved forward with > the idea yet. That makes sense, since pursuing it would have been gated on > ensurepip, and the Python 3 migration has been higher priority recently. > > Cheers, > Nick. > > _______________________________________________ > 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