I think that Thomas' proposal makes sense. I would be ok to also add it to setuptools so that it can be used sooner by projects that don't require python 3.6.
Sylvain On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 9:23 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Changing packaging by updating the standard library will fail. It’s been > attempted. > > > > The inherent problem is you need to fix packaging for people already using > python, which means if you add a feature to the standard library, only the > people who always run the latest and greatest can ever use the feature. In > a world where we are talking about Python 3.6/3.7 and python 2.7 is by far > the most used version of python (and python usage is split pretty evenly > between 3.4 and 3.5 IIRC), no one will use new packaging features in the > standard library. > > > > Putting something in setuptools means it will actually be used. I think > some of the goals of this sig is to be able to completely sunset distutils > and replace it with much better solutions (plural) that all speak the same > protocol. > > > > *From:* Distutils-SIG [mailto:distutils-sig-bounces+tritium-list= > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Sylvain Corlay > *Sent:* Monday, August 22, 2016 2:16 AM > *To:* Ralf Gommers <[email protected]> > *Cc:* distutils-sig <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [Distutils] Proposed new Distutils API for compiler flag > detection (Issue26689) > > > > Hi, > > On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Ralf Gommers <[email protected] > > wrote: > > > On top of that there are technical reasons (don't want to test > combinations of python + setuptools that both change per release) and > organizational ones (distutils maintenance is terrible, many simple bugfix > patches don't get merged for ages, setuptools at least fixes regressions > quite fast). > > > > I'm not sure if there's an official policy on adding new things to > distutils, but if not then this request is a good time to make one. > Assuming of course that the setuptools devs are willing to merge features > like the one from Sylvain. > > > > > > I find this worrying that the main arguments to not include a patch would > be that > > > > - this part of the standard library is not very maintained (things don't > get merged) > > - earlier versions of won't have it > > > > The former is a bad sign for a standard library and the latter is inherent > to any new feature. Whether it is a policy or not to not add new features > to distutils it is clear that a code base that does not evolve is dead. > > > > How about, instead, we continue improving it? > > > > Sylvain > > > > _______________________________________________ > Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig > >
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
