On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 7:49 AM, M.-A. Lemburg <m...@egenix.com> wrote: > On 2009-03-27 04:19, Guido van Rossum wrote: >> - keep distutils, but start deprecating certain higher-level >> functionality in it (e.g. bdist_rpm) >> - don't try to provide higher-level functionality in the stdlib, but >> instead let third party tools built on top of these core APIs compete > > Should this be read as: > > - remove bdist_rpm from the stdlib and let it live on PyPI > > ? > > Perhaps I just misunderstand the comment. > > I think that esp. the bdist_* commands help developers a lot by > removing the need to know how to build e.g. RPMs or Windows > installers and let distutils deal with it. > > The bdist_* commands don't really provide any higher level > functionality. They only provide interfaces to certain packaging > formats commonly used on the various platforms. > > Instead of removing such functionality, I think we should add > more support for standard packaging formats to distutils, e.g. > bdist_deb, bdist_pkg, etc. >
+1 ... for this ... > And for eggs, there should be a standard bdist_egg, written against > the core distutils APIs (*), creating archives which other Python > package managers can then use in whatever way they seem fit. > If not the eggs we have today ... the eggs we may incubate for tomorrow ... XD > Just please don't tie eggs to one specific package manager, > e.g. having to install setuptools just to run eggified packages > is just plain wrong. The format itself doesn't require this and > neither should the software shipped with those eggs. > ... partly, because of this ... ;) -- Regards, Olemis. Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ Featured article: Comandos : Pipe Viewer ... ¿Qué está pasando por esta tubería? _______________________________________________ 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