On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 12:58 PM Chris Barker <chris.bar...@noaa.gov> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > As to using pip to build wheels -- there is good reason to do that >> > now, but in s post PEP 517 world, one would call the build system >> > directly to build a wheel-- after all, all pip should be doing is >> > calling the build system anyway. >> >> I disagree - "pip wheel" will still be useful, for example to obtain a >> wheel from PyPI either by downloading or download & build. Also just >> to have a unified interface that works regardless of the project >> backend - if a project switches from setuptools to flit, for example, >> it would be good if deployment and test scripts didn't have to change. >> > > Isn't that why we have PEP 517? I unified interface to build tools? > > So I still expect pip wheel to be useful in a post-PEP 517 world. > > > Maybe so -- but all pip should be doing is passing off the job to the > back-end. > > Again, the package manager, well, manages the packages. It shouldn't be > concerned with how to build them. > pip has always been under appreciated as a build tool. Suppose the next version of pip dropped support for sdists and could only install wheels. Then it would not be a build tool. Very little changes when it switches to supporting sdists from its own setup.py machinery to a more pluggable mechanism. It is a little controversial that it can produce wheels for re-use but the feature is very practical. You could put 'pip wheel' under a different command line tool but why bother.
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
