+1 On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Steve Dower <steve.do...@python.org> wrote:
> "add it to setuptools first, and then add things to distutils where we > feel they're sufficiently stable to not need the benefit of the faster > setuptools update cycle" > > I nominate this as the official policy on API changes for distutils, with > regular maintenance mode policies applying to anything else. > > Top-posted from my Windows Phone > ------------------------------ > From: Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> > Sent: 9/4/2016 2:19 > To: Sylvain Corlay <sylvain.cor...@gmail.com> > Cc: distutils sig <distutils-sig@python.org> > Subject: Re: [Distutils] What is the official position on distutils? > > On 4 September 2016 at 06:44, Sylvain Corlay <sylvain.cor...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi Brett, > > > > On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > >> > >> > >> If Jason is up for the responsibility that seems like a reasonable > >> approach to take. It also helps test out features in setuptools first > before > >> upstreaming it. > >> > > > > How do you see `has_flag` get into setuptools? By monkey-patching > distutils' > > ccompiler to have it aside of `has_function` when setuptools is imported? > > > > I find really weird the idea of adding this in a convoluted fashion > instead > > of allowing incremental improvement of distutils. > > The change to distutils would still be a plain patch to distutils, it > would just be accepted at the API design level in setuptools first. > > The problem you're running into right now isn't a technical one - it's > that there isn't anyone that currently feels like they have sufficient > design authority over the distutils API to accept your proposal, hence > Brett starting this thread to address that underlying recurring > question, rather than the specifics of your change. > > Jason *definitely* has that design authority over setuptools though, > and will be tasked with making any API additions available on older > versions of Python via setuptools regardless of what policy we adopt > for distutils maintenance, so if he's amenable to the idea, it makes > sense to me to invert the order we ask those questions: add it to > setuptools first, and then add things to distutils where we feel > they're sufficiently stable to not need the benefit of the faster > setuptools update cycle. > > Cheers, > Nick. > > -- > Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- cordially, Anna
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
