On 5 May 2016 at 07:57, Robert Collins <robe...@robertcollins.net> wrote: > We've a history in this group of biting off too much and things not > getting executed. We're *still* in the final phases of deploying > PEP-508, and it was conceptually trivial. I'm not arguing that we > shouldn't make things better, I'm arguing that tying two separate > things together because we *can* seems, based on the historical > record, to be unwise.
This is a very good point, and ties in nicely with Nick's comment about taking small steps to make things better than they currently are. On that basis, I'd be +1 on a simple proposal to add a new "install this stuff before we do the build" capability that sits in setup.cfg. Let's keep build isolation off the table for now. There's probably enough substantive detail (I'll do my best to avoid bikeshedding over trivia :-)) to thrash out in that simple proposal. For example, if package foo specifies that it needs a new version of setuptools to build, is it OK for "pip install foo" to automatically upgrade setuptools, or should it fail with an error "your setuptools is too old"? If it does auto-upgrade, then if the build of foo fails, is it OK that we won't be able to revert the upgrade of setuptools? How should we handle cases where a package specifies that the it needs an *older* version of setuptools? I'd expect we simply bail and report an error for that one - it should never really happen, so why waste time on "clever" solutions? Anyway, we can have these sorts of debate when we get down to details. Paul _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
