> On Jan 24, 2016, at 7:21 PM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: > > Maybe we need wheel-builders-sig? Their mandate would be to hash out > things like how to build binary-libraries-wrapped-up-in-wheels, share > knowledge about the minutiae of linker behavior on different platforms > (oh god there's so much minutiae), maintain tools like delocate and > auditwheel (and whatever the equivalent will be for windows... and do > we really need 3 different tools?), collect knowledge from where it's > scattered now and put it into the guide at packaging.python.org [1], > etc.? It seems a bit outside distutils-sig's focus in practice, since > this would all be about third-party tools and individual package > authors as opposed to distutils-sig's focus on writing > interoperability PEPs and maintaining the core python.org-affiliated > infrastructure like PyPI / setuptools / pip.
I’m not about to tell someone they *have* to use distutils-sig, but I think at this point it’s perfectly reasonable to discuss things of this nature here as well. distutils-sig would really be more accurate if it was named packaging-sig, but historical reasons ;) ----------------- Donald Stufft PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
