(Somehow this one had remained unanswered.) Andreas Enge <[email protected]> skribis:
> Probably (once the python changes dust settles), it will be enough to simply > add setuptools as an input to the packages. > > I would like to suggest a few modifications to the python build system > resulting from discussions with Brandon Invergo at the GHM. If I understood > correctly, then "setup.py check" only makes some basic checks on the package > and can be safely dropped. This is corroborated by > python setup.py --help-commands | grep check > on pytz, for instance, which displays > check perform some checks on the package > > However, "python setup.py --help-commands | grep test": > test run unit tests after in-place build > I think this it what we would like to do in the check phase. > > Then it is possible to also separate the build and install phases: > build build everything needed to install > > I think we would like to add such a phase. You mean a ‘build’ phase, right? And also change the ‘check’ phase to run ‘python setup.py test’ (what does ‘python setup.py check’ do concretely?) Sounds like both are good ideas. > Stylistically, they should probably be obtained by a call to one function > returning a procedure calling setup.py with "build", "test" and "install", > respectively, instead of copy-pasting three times the same code. Agreed. For reference, here’s Nixpkgs’ Python builder, which I had originally contributed (as crazy as it may seem): https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/development/python-modules/generic/default.nix It actually uses ‘easy_install’, which appears to be, well, easy. And presumably it does more things (like building a zipped .egg file). Perhaps it’d be even better? What do the pythoneers think? Ludo’.
