actually editable installs can be made uninstallable trivially in gumby-elf i would create a fake wheel with files inside to facilitate the path building for namespaces, and a local version number (so pip would create my exe files and uninstall clean)
-- Ronny On 24.11.2016 01:23, Daniel Holth wrote: > > I wouldn't be afraid of editable installs. They are trivial and > involve building the package in place and putting a .pth file where it > will be noticed. Specify editable packages can't necessarily be > uninstalled in a standard way and you are done. > > The bespoke build tool tells pip where the package root is (where > .dist-info will be written), usually . or ./src, then pip does .pth. > > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016, 17:16 Chris Barker <chris.bar...@noaa.gov > <mailto:chris.bar...@noaa.gov>> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 6:35 AM, Thomas Kluyver > <tho...@kluyver.me.uk <mailto:tho...@kluyver.me.uk>> wrote: > > > Questions: > 1. Editable installs. The PEP currenly specifies a hook to do an > editable install (like 'pip install -e' or 'setup.py develop') > into a > given prefix. I don't think that specifying a prefix is > sufficient to > cover '--user' installation, which uses a different install > scheme, > especially on Windows and OSX framework builds. We can: > a. Add an extra parameter 'user' to the hook, to override the > prefix and > do a user install. > b. Leave it as is, and do not support editable user > installation (which > would make me sad, as I do editable user installs regularly) > > > Please, please, let's figure SOMETHING our here - editable > installs (or "develop" installs) are a critical tool. Frankly, I > don't know how anyone can develop a package without them. > > Back in the day I struggle mightily with kludging sys.path, and, > relative imports that never really worked right, and on and on -- > it SUCKED. > > Then I discovered setuptools develop mode -- yeah! IN fact, I > don't think I'd ever use setuptools at all if I didn't need it to > get develop mode! > > c. Decide that editable installs are too fiddly to > standardise, and > leave it to users to invoke a tool directly to do an editable > install. > > > Not sure what that means -- does that mean that you couldn't get > an editable isntall with pip? but rather you would do: > > setup.py develop if you had setuptools as your build system, and > > some_other_command if you had some other build tool? > > Not too bad, but why not have a standard way to invoke develop > mode? If the tool can support it, why not have a way for pip to > tell an arbitrary build system to "please install this package in > develop mode" > > On the other hand: > > I've always thought we were moving toward proper separation of > concerns, in which case, pip should be focused on resolving > dependencies and finding and installing packages. > > Should it even be possible to build and install a package from > source with pip? > > But if it is, then it might as well support editable installs as well. > > The complication I see here is that a tool can't know how to > install in editable mode unless it knows about the python > environment it it running in -- which is easy for a tool built > with python, but a problem for a tool written some other way. > > However, I see from PEP 517: > > > The build backend object is expected to have attributes which > provide some or all of the following hooks. The > commonconfig_settings argument is described after the individual > hooks: > > def get_build_requires(config_settings): > ... > > > So I guess we can count on a Python front end, at least, so 1(a) > should be doable. > > In fact, is the user-install issue any different for editable > installs than regular ones? > > -CHB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Dash vs. underscore, bikeshed reloaded! Currently, the > table name > uses a dash: [build-system], but the key added by PEP 517 uses an > underscore: build_backend. This seems a bit messy. I propose > that we > change build_backend to build-backend for consistency. Dashes and > underscores can both be used in a TOML key without needing > quoting. > > Thanks, > Thomas > _______________________________________________ > Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org > <mailto:Distutils-SIG@python.org> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig > > > > > -- > > Christopher Barker, Ph.D. > Oceanographer > > Emergency Response Division > NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice > 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax > Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception > > chris.bar...@noaa.gov <mailto:chris.bar...@noaa.gov> > _______________________________________________ > Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org > <mailto: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
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig