On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 9:31 AM, P.J. Eby <p...@telecommunity.com> wrote: > At 08:32 AM 3/25/2009 -0500, Olemis Lang wrote: >> >> Sometimes it also happens that, once one such build/packaging systems >> is adopted, it is difficult to switch to using another one, since apps >> (... and plugins systems ...) are frequently hard-coupled to the pkg >> sys «exotic features» and support (... what comes to my mind right now >> is Trac plugins which are a little bit dependant on setuptools entry >> points and so on ...). > > Please note that entry points are not coupled to easy_install.
Yes u'r right and I know ... perhaps there are better examples to illustrate what I was saying ... which is that ... distutils architecture is great since I can code «my own» extension (e.g. setuptools ;) with «my» potentially non-standard | conflicting features ... (e.g. entry points ... AFAIK they'r only de-facto standards, not in approved final PEPs ;) Note: ... I'm not saying that I've contributed to setuptools (the «my» thing ...), it's just a way of talking ... hope you dont mind ... ;) > They have a > documented file format and API that's *distributed* with setuptools, but is > not dependent on it and does not require .egg files, either. ... but Trac plugins *do require* egg files ... (AFAIK after reading Trac docs and implementation of plugin upload from /admin/plugins, egg cache for plugins ... and so on ...) and this is what I was talking about ... apps (e.g. Trac) depending *today* on setuptools (e.g. egg files ...) ... not easy_install since, in fact I could install plugins with apt (... or similar ;) too ... although I always build egg files, but this is my own decision BTW since I prefer to inherit configs & plugins for all envs ... but this is a little bit OT here since its specific to Trac ... ;) > There's > nothing stopping an independent implementation in the stdlib, ala PEP 376's > metadata API, which is designed to be backward compatible with setuptools. Of course there is nothing «stopping an independent implementation in the stdlib [...] designed to be backward compatible with setuptools.», but it is still not there ... AFAIK ... and that's what I was talking about ... considering my example ... I'd like it in there ... 2 ;) Like I said I like the idea behind easy_install, but not the «holes» I mentioned ... but I wanna see filled out ... maybe its just a matter of time ... :) > It could be extended to support entry points as well. > ... and then Trac plugins (falling-back to my example ;) will rely on std features ... in a near future ... ok ... -- Regards, Olemis. Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ Featured article: _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
