On 3 November 2016 at 10:39, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > It may also be feasible to define an ABI for "linuxconda" that's > broader than the manylinux1 ABI, so folks can publish conda wheels > direct to PyPI, and then pip could define a way for distros to > indicate their ABI is "conda compatible" somehow.
Even on the "hard" cases like Windows, it may be possible to define a standard approach that goes something along the lines of defining a standard location that (somehow) gets added to the load path, and interested parties provide DLLs for external dependencies, which the users can then manually place in those locations. Or there's the option that's been mentioned before, but never (to my knowledge) developed into a complete proposal, for packaging up external dependencies as wheels. In some ways, Windows is actually an *easier* platform in this regard, as it's much more consistent in what it does provide - the CRT, and nothing else, basically. So all of the rest of the "external dependencies" need to be shipped, which is a bad thing, but there's no combinatorial explosion of system dependencies to worry about, which is good (as long as the "external dependencies" ecosystem maintains internal consistency). Paul _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
