Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[zooko]

On Jun 20, 2008, at 11:11 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:


Sure, let's meet at #distutils


By the way, I've noticed that people occasionally appear on  
irc.freenode.net channel #setuptools to ask for help with their usage  
of setuptools.  Presumably they are just running a "list channels"  
tool on irc.freenode.net and noticing "#setuptools" listed therein.   
Perhaps they will likewise do so for the channel "#distutils".


Regards,

Zooko

___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[zooko]

Another way that easy_install/setuptools gets tested is when projects  
that use it have automated, automatically scheduled tests of their  
install process.


For example, divmod Nevow recently set up an automated test of  
installing Nevow using easy_install.


For example, here is a successful install:

http://divmod.org/users/buildbot.twistd/q-nevowinstall/builds/26/step- 
shell_3/0


Unfortunately, such tests only test some released version of  
setuptools/easy_install, not the current head version.  It would be  
potentially interesting for such tests of setuptools-using-projects- 
install-and-unit-tests to be run in response to SVN checkins to  
setuptools (triggered by buildbot).


Regards,

Zooko

___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Tarek Ziadé]

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 7:43 PM, Chris Galvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>
>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Chris Galvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>I can spend a bit of time on sunday on this topic, writing a
>>few scenarii. What I have been thinking of is:
>>
>>- a doctest for each command setuptools provides
>>- a doctest for easy_install
>>- a doctest that uses setuptools/distutils to build, release,
>>and upload a package
>>
>>Anything else in mind ?
>>
>>Tarek
>>
>>
>>That list looks like a great place to start :)  I can spend some
>>time this weekend working on this as well, if you want to
>>coordinate efforts.
>>
>>
>> Sure that would be great
>>
>> I can be present Sunday from 9am to 11am and after 8pm CEST time (Paris)
>> So i guess we can meet after 8pm if you are locate in Texas ?
>>
>> Tarek
>>
> Yes, I live in Texas.  Anytime after 8pm CEST works great since that will
> be 1pm for me.  Would IRC be a good discussion place to meet so that others
> could help out as well?


Sure, let's meet at #distutils






>
>
> -- Chris Galvan
>
>


-- 
Tarek Ziadé | Association AfPy | www.afpy.org
Blog FR | http://programmation-python.org
Blog EN | http://tarekziade.wordpress.com/
___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Chris Galvan]

Tarek Ziadé wrote:



On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Chris Galvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> wrote:



I can spend a bit of time on sunday on this topic, writing a
few scenarii. What I have been thinking of is:

- a doctest for each command setuptools provides
- a doctest for easy_install
- a doctest that uses setuptools/distutils to build, release,
and upload a package

Anything else in mind ?

Tarek


That list looks like a great place to start :)  I can spend some
time this weekend working on this as well, if you want to
coordinate efforts.


Sure that would be great

I can be present Sunday from 9am to 11am and after 8pm CEST time (Paris) 
So i guess we can meet after 8pm if you are locate in Texas ?


Tarek
Yes, I live in Texas.  Anytime after 8pm CEST works great since that 
will be 1pm for me.  Would IRC be a good discussion place to meet so 
that others could help out as well?


-- Chris Galvan

___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Tarek Ziadé]

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Chris Galvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>
> I can spend a bit of time on sunday on this topic, writing a few scenarii.
>> What I have been thinking of is:
>>
>> - a doctest for each command setuptools provides
>> - a doctest for easy_install
>> - a doctest that uses setuptools/distutils to build, release, and upload a
>> package
>>
>> Anything else in mind ?
>>
>> Tarek
>>
>>
>>  That list looks like a great place to start :)  I can spend some time
> this weekend working on this as well, if you want to coordinate efforts.
>

Sure that would be great

I can be present Sunday from 9am to 11am and after 8pm CEST time (Paris)
So i guess we can meet after 8pm if you are locate in Texas ?

Tarek
___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Chris Galvan]

Tarek Ziadé wrote:



On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 7:14 PM, Dave Peterson 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:



If you want to expand the available development pool for
setuptools, I would strongly suggest focusing development
efforts on creating a regression test suite emphasizing
end-to-end functional testing of the current functionality.
 Such tests would ideally be factored for narrative clarity
and compact expressiveness, rather like Jim Fulton's doctests
for easy_install's .exe wrappers, and the doctests for
zc.buildout.  (Because if they're too complicated for me to
read, they'll take too long for me to review.)


Okay, we'll see what we can do about that here at Enthought.  So
far we'd been focusing on bugs / new features that we thought
needed to be addressed but that effort can be redirected a bit to
helping write tests.  I think Tarek suggested a sprint this
weekend but I'm not sure if any of our guys will be available that
soon.  I'll ask around.


Ok cool,

I can spend a bit of time on sunday on this topic, writing a few 
scenarii. What I have been thinking of is:


- a doctest for each command setuptools provides
- a doctest for easy_install
- a doctest that uses setuptools/distutils to build, release, and 
upload a package


Anything else in mind ?

Tarek


That list looks like a great place to start :)  I can spend some time 
this weekend working on this as well, if you want to coordinate efforts.


-- Chris Galvan
 




-- Dave


___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org

http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig




--
Tarek Ziadé | Association AfPy | www.afpy.org 
Blog FR | http://programmation-python.org
Blog EN | http://tarekziade.wordpress.com/


___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
  


___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Tarek Ziadé]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 7:14 PM, Dave Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>
> If you want to expand the available development pool for setuptools, I
>> would strongly suggest focusing development efforts on creating a regression
>> test suite emphasizing end-to-end functional testing of the current
>> functionality.  Such tests would ideally be factored for narrative clarity
>> and compact expressiveness, rather like Jim Fulton's doctests for
>> easy_install's .exe wrappers, and the doctests for zc.buildout.  (Because if
>> they're too complicated for me to read, they'll take too long for me to
>> review.)
>>
>
> Okay, we'll see what we can do about that here at Enthought.  So far we'd
> been focusing on bugs / new features that we thought needed to be addressed
> but that effort can be redirected a bit to helping write tests.  I think
> Tarek suggested a sprint this weekend but I'm not sure if any of our guys
> will be available that soon.  I'll ask around.


Ok cool,

I can spend a bit of time on sunday on this topic, writing a few scenarii.
What I have been thinking of is:

- a doctest for each command setuptools provides
- a doctest for easy_install
- a doctest that uses setuptools/distutils to build, release, and upload a
package

Anything else in mind ?

Tarek




>
>
> -- Dave
>
>
> ___
> Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
>



-- 
Tarek Ziadé | Association AfPy | www.afpy.org
Blog FR | http://programmation-python.org
Blog EN | http://tarekziade.wordpress.com/
___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Dave Peterson]

Phillip J. Eby wrote:

At 06:27 PM 6/16/2008 -0500, Dave Peterson wrote:

Phillip J. Eby wrote:

At 12:57 PM 6/16/2008 +1200, Greg Ewing wrote:

Any discussion of that sort seems to get hopelessly
bogged down, so bikeshedding is all that's left for
people to do.


What about testing patches?  Writing test code?  Writing more docs?
There's *plenty* of less controversial work to go around.  The only 
reason most of the outstanding patches I'm aware of haven't been 
applied yet is because they haven't been tested.  (Or more 
precisely, because setuptools hasn't been thoroughly tested with the 
patches applied.)



I can help test some of the patches


Don't test patches - test setuptools with the patches.  :)  More 
precisely, make sure you test things beyond what the patch is supposed 
to do, to make sure that other things aren't affected.  This is 
particularly important for patches to easy_install, which is 
ridiculously complicated

due to all the obscure edge cases it has to be able to handle.


Right.  That is what I meant but worded poorly. :-)


 I've seen people posting to the tracker, but I can't commit to 
svn.   Beyond running the setuptools test suite


The test suite is pretty useless for most of these kinds of patches.  
It essentially only exercises various internals of pkg_resources and a 
few other things that are almost never touched.  I'm talking testing 
as in "actually install some packages in a few different kinds of 
install targets, using a few different options".  I don't have a 
rigorous process for that, as I tend to pick things on the basis of 
the code paths to be exercised.  But that might not be an option for 
casual testers.


Still, I'd run it anyway. :-)   I definitely don't have the depth of 
experience to know what features being exercised hit what code paths.   
But I do use setuptools for both building and installing on Windows XP, 
Mac OS X, and various Linux flavors.   We heavily use eggs here at 
Enthought. :-)



If I had it all to do over -- and I didn't simply run screaming from 
attempting the task in the first place -- I would write a full 
functional test suite, including chrooting tests if necessary.  In the 
long run, it would have saved enormous amounts of manual test time, 
and we could have had more people involved in development a long time 
ago.


That, by the way, is why "writing test code" is on the list above.


and verifying that things seems to work for me and my environment, is 
there anything else that will help get some of the patches into svn?


BTW, most of those things you mention all effectively boil down to 
writing patches in one way or another. :-)  How do we make sure that 
after they get some review they get checked in when it seems so few 
people have check-in privileges?  Phillip, you already mentioned that 
you're short on time and no one else has responded to a plea for 
finding out who has check-in privileges.


Jim Fulton has previously been "blessed" by me to apply 
non-controversial patches to setuptools after giving me a heads-up.  
(But note that he's probably busier than I am, and unlikely to have 
bandwidth for stuff that doesn't affect zc.buildout or Zope in some way.)


If you want to expand the available development pool for setuptools, I 
would strongly suggest focusing development efforts on creating a 
regression test suite emphasizing end-to-end functional testing of the 
current functionality.  Such tests would ideally be factored for 
narrative clarity and compact expressiveness, rather like Jim Fulton's 
doctests for easy_install's .exe wrappers, and the doctests for 
zc.buildout.  (Because if they're too complicated for me to read, 
they'll take too long for me to review.)


Okay, we'll see what we can do about that here at Enthought.  So far 
we'd been focusing on bugs / new features that we thought needed to be 
addressed but that effort can be redirected a bit to helping write 
tests.  I think Tarek suggested a sprint this weekend but I'm not sure 
if any of our guys will be available that soon.  I'll ask around.


-- Dave

___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Tarek Ziadé]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 2:37 AM, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> cut



>
> If you want to expand the available development pool for setuptools, I
> would strongly suggest focusing development efforts on creating a regression
> test suite emphasizing end-to-end functional testing of the current
> functionality.  Such tests would ideally be factored for narrative clarity
> and compact expressiveness, rather like Jim Fulton's doctests for
> easy_install's .exe wrappers, and the doctests for zc.buildout.  (Because if
> they're too complicated for me to read, they'll take too long for me to
> review.)
>
> If people *really* want to solve the development bottleneck, this is the
> way to go, because it will reduce my role to deciding whether something
> should go in, and seeing if it passes the tests on a platform or two.


Having a clear state of what "sits in your folder of patches" would be
useful too.
(http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2008-April/009278.html)

I am not sure http://bugs.python.org/setuptools/ reflects it


That's something I think I could manage to do, even with my current work
> load.


What about dedicating a sprint on building a regression test suite this
Saturday ? It is Python bug day.

I am in to work on some doctests. Do you have the time to give us more
details on what you would
like to see ? Maybe you could write one-sentence doctests for us to start it
up this week end ?


Tarek




>
>
> ___
> Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
>



-- 
Tarek Ziadé | Association AfPy | www.afpy.org
Blog FR | http://programmation-python.org
Blog EN | http://tarekziade.wordpress.com/
___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Phillip J. Eby]

At 06:27 PM 6/16/2008 -0500, Dave Peterson wrote:

Phillip J. Eby wrote:

At 12:57 PM 6/16/2008 +1200, Greg Ewing wrote:

Any discussion of that sort seems to get hopelessly
bogged down, so bikeshedding is all that's left for
people to do.


What about testing patches?  Writing test code?  Writing more docs?
There's *plenty* of less controversial work to go around.  The only 
reason most of the outstanding patches I'm aware of haven't been 
applied yet is because they haven't been tested.  (Or more 
precisely, because setuptools hasn't been thoroughly tested with 
the patches applied.)



I can help test some of the patches


Don't test patches - test setuptools with the patches.  :)  More 
precisely, make sure you test things beyond what the patch is 
supposed to do, to make sure that other things aren't affected.  This 
is particularly important for patches to easy_install, which is 
ridiculously complicated

due to all the obscure edge cases it has to be able to handle.


 I've seen people posting to the tracker, but I can't commit to 
svn.   Beyond running the setuptools test suite


The test suite is pretty useless for most of these kinds of 
patches.  It essentially only exercises various internals of 
pkg_resources and a few other things that are almost never 
touched.  I'm talking testing as in "actually install some packages 
in a few different kinds of install targets, using a few different 
options".  I don't have a rigorous process for that, as I tend to 
pick things on the basis of the code paths to be exercised.  But that 
might not be an option for casual testers.


If I had it all to do over -- and I didn't simply run screaming from 
attempting the task in the first place -- I would write a full 
functional test suite, including chrooting tests if necessary.  In 
the long run, it would have saved enormous amounts of manual test 
time, and we could have had more people involved in development a 
long time ago.


That, by the way, is why "writing test code" is on the list above.


and verifying that things seems to work for me and my environment, 
is there anything else that will help get some of the patches into svn?


BTW, most of those things you mention all effectively boil down to 
writing patches in one way or another. :-)  How do we make sure that 
after they get some review they get checked in when it seems so few 
people have check-in privileges?  Phillip, you already mentioned 
that you're short on time and no one else has responded to a plea 
for finding out who has check-in privileges.


Jim Fulton has previously been "blessed" by me to apply 
non-controversial patches to setuptools after giving me a 
heads-up.  (But note that he's probably busier than I am, and 
unlikely to have bandwidth for stuff that doesn't affect zc.buildout 
or Zope in some way.)


If you want to expand the available development pool for setuptools, 
I would strongly suggest focusing development efforts on creating a 
regression test suite emphasizing end-to-end functional testing of 
the current functionality.  Such tests would ideally be factored for 
narrative clarity and compact expressiveness, rather like Jim 
Fulton's doctests for easy_install's .exe wrappers, and the doctests 
for zc.buildout.  (Because if they're too complicated for me to read, 
they'll take too long for me to review.)


If people *really* want to solve the development bottleneck, this is 
the way to go, because it will reduce my role to deciding whether 
something should go in, and seeing if it passes the tests on a 
platform or two.  That's something I think I could manage to do, even 
with my current work load.


___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Dave Peterson]

Phillip J. Eby wrote:

At 12:57 PM 6/16/2008 +1200, Greg Ewing wrote:

Any discussion of that sort seems to get hopelessly
bogged down, so bikeshedding is all that's left for
people to do.


What about testing patches?  Writing test code?  Writing more docs?  
There's *plenty* of less controversial work to go around.  The only 
reason most of the outstanding patches I'm aware of haven't been 
applied yet is because they haven't been tested.  (Or more precisely, 
because setuptools hasn't been thoroughly tested with the patches 
applied.)



I can help test some of the patches I've seen people posting to the 
tracker, but I can't commit to svn.   Beyond running the setuptools test 
suite and verifying that things seems to work for me and my environment, 
is there anything else that will help get some of the patches into svn?


BTW, most of those things you mention all effectively boil down to 
writing patches in one way or another. :-)  How do we make sure that 
after they get some review they get checked in when it seems so few 
people have check-in privileges?  Phillip, you already mentioned that 
you're short on time and no one else has responded to a plea for finding 
out who has check-in privileges.  IIRC, you had previously talked about 
coming up with a process to "bless" people but I don't think that went 
very far.   I'm interested in participating but unsure of how to go 
about the process.



-- Dave

___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Phillip J. Eby]

At 12:57 PM 6/16/2008 +1200, Greg Ewing wrote:

Any discussion of that sort seems to get hopelessly
bogged down, so bikeshedding is all that's left for
people to do.


What about testing patches?  Writing test code?  Writing more 
docs?  There's *plenty* of less controversial work to go around.  The 
only reason most of the outstanding patches I'm aware of haven't been 
applied yet is because they haven't been tested.  (Or more precisely, 
because setuptools hasn't been thoroughly tested with the patches applied.)


___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Greg Ewing]

Phillip J. Eby wrote:

What do you mean, "sounds like"?  It *is* marketing propaganda.  And it 
worked very well, I might add.  ;-)


Maybe on some people, but I tend to get turned off
by that sort of thing.

In any case, if it gets into the core, then the
marketing aspect will have done its job and will no
longer be necessary.

(On a side note, I find it tremendously amusing that this particular 
bike shed seems to be attracting the *most* attention, out of all the 
things that need to be fixed, improved, or replaced altogether.)


Any discussion of that sort seems to get hopelessly
bogged down, so bikeshedding is all that's left for
people to do.

--
Greg
___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Michael Foord]

Phillip J. Eby wrote:

At 02:15 AM 6/15/2008 -0700, zooko wrote:

Now that you mention it, I have heard more than one person snort
derisively about the name "easy_install", and say something to the
effect that it isn't a proper name.  This makes me think that it
causes the "anti-marketing-propaganda" reaction in some folks.


You seem to be under the mistaken impression that my choice of name 
was accidental or whimsical, rather than carefully chosen to appeal to 
some people at the possible expense of others.


And you can't actually avoid that tradeoff, any more than you can 
shove a program's complexity under the rug.  All you can do is attempt 
to please a different group, or to please no-one.  You don't get the 
option of pleasing everybody.


Personally I think 'easy_install' is well named and not heard of anyone 
who misunderstood its intent or purpose...


Michael Foord



___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig



--
http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
http://www.theotherdelia.co.uk/
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
http://www.ironpython.info/
http://www.resolverhacks.net/

___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Phillip J. Eby]

At 02:15 AM 6/15/2008 -0700, zooko wrote:

Now that you mention it, I have heard more than one person snort
derisively about the name "easy_install", and say something to the
effect that it isn't a proper name.  This makes me think that it
causes the "anti-marketing-propaganda" reaction in some folks.


You seem to be under the mistaken impression that my choice of name 
was accidental or whimsical, rather than carefully chosen to appeal 
to some people at the possible expense of others.


And you can't actually avoid that tradeoff, any more than you can 
shove a program's complexity under the rug.  All you can do is 
attempt to please a different group, or to please no-one.  You don't 
get the option of pleasing everybody.


___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[zooko]

On Jun 14, 2008, at 7:16 PM, Ben Finney wrote:


Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:


My objection to the name "easy_install" is that is sounds like a
piece of marketing propaganda. If something based on it were to
become part of the standard distribution, I would hope that a more
neutral name could be found.


I share this objection.


Now that you mention it, I have heard more than one person snort  
derisively about the name "easy_install", and say something to the  
effect that it isn't a proper name.  This makes me think that it  
causes the "anti-marketing-propaganda" reaction in some folks.


Considering the opinions expressed by others in this thread, I'm  
changing my mind and would not object to changing the name.


Regards,

Zooko
___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Ben Finney]

"Phillip J. Eby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> (On a side note, I find it tremendously amusing that this particular
> bike shed seems to be attracting the *most* attention, out of all
> the things that need to be fixed, improved, or replaced altogether.)

It's partly the bike-shed effect, true.

On the other hand, it's been a wart for a long time, so this period of
"fix things for the future" has inevitably brought this issue up. If
it's going to be addressed properly, now seems like the best time.

-- 
 \   “As the most participatory form of mass speech yet developed, |
  `\the Internet deserves the highest protection from governmental |
_o__)   intrusion.” —U.S. District Court Judge Dalzell |
Ben Finney

___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Phillip J. Eby]

At 11:51 AM 6/15/2008 +1200, Greg Ewing wrote:

My objection to the name "easy_install" is that is sounds
like a piece of marketing propaganda.


What do you mean, "sounds like"?  It *is* marketing propaganda.  And 
it worked very well, I might add.  ;-)


(On a side note, I find it tremendously amusing that this particular 
bike shed seems to be attracting the *most* attention, out of all the 
things that need to be fixed, improved, or replaced altogether.)


___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Ben Finney]

Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> My objection to the name "easy_install" is that is sounds like a
> piece of marketing propaganda. If something based on it were to
> become part of the standard distribution, I would hope that a more
> neutral name could be found.

I share this objection.

Also, the name 'easy_install' gives no indication that it's specific
to Python. Such a generic name shouldn't be chosen for such a specific
subsystem.

Further, when other, non-install actions are introduced (such as the
much-requested "uninstall" action), we should already have a name that
will allow those actions to fit. I would hate to see the existing
situation compounded by the introduction of some 'easy_uninstall'
command.

The suggestion of 'pyegg' for the command name seems like a good
start, but there are doubtless others that should be considered.

-- 
 \   "I went to a general store. They wouldn't let me buy anything |
  `\  specifically."  -- Steven Wright |
_o__)  |
Ben Finney

___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Greg Ewing]

Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:

-On [20080614 03:18], zooko ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:

I said it was "too late", because there are already lots of people  
worldwide who know the name "easy_install".


Nothing proper release notes and the likes cannot fix.


My objection to the name "easy_install" is that is sounds
like a piece of marketing propaganda. If something based
on it were to become part of the standard distribution,
I would hope that a more neutral name could be found.

--
Greg
___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Tres Seaver]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
> -On [20080614 03:18], zooko ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> I said it was "too late", because there are already lots of people  
>> worldwide who know the name "easy_install".  It would be costly to  
>> them to change it -- they'll go looking for the new version of  
>> easy_install someday and won't find it, stuff like that.
> 
> Nothing proper release notes and the likes cannot fix. Heck, you could
> provide a symlink from easy_install to the new pyegg --or whatever the name
> might be-- for a few releases and if it is easy_install that's being
> invoked, you act accordingly. Or even a placeholder script invoking the
> necessary things.
> 
> Also, your claim of 'lots of people worldwide' is taken out of thin air. I
> doubt you have evidence in favour or against.

I'm quite confident that there are hundreds-to-thousands of users to
date, plus lots of third-party docs which describe using 'easy_install'
to get packages or applications installed.

- -1 to the rename.  I don't think 'easy_install' is ever a candidate for
/usr/bin on a system under package management, given that it breaks the
expectations of packagers that they control the horizontal and vertical
for software installation.


Tres.
- --
===
Tres Seaver  +1 540-429-0999  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"http://palladion.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIVAs4+gerLs4ltQ4RAruSAJwNK3cH5dIBKn16pqxaTS6bhi/ndQCeIX0z
NsqE/VyaWLFYom+eAMUGUNU=
=WTG7
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Andreas Jung]

--On 14. Juni 2008 08:46:02 +0200 Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



-On [20080614 03:18], zooko ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:

I said it was "too late", because there are already lots of people
worldwide who know the name "easy_install".  It would be costly to
them to change it -- they'll go looking for the new version of
easy_install someday and won't find it, stuff like that.




-100 on renaming easy_install to something else.


Also, your claim of 'lots of people worldwide' is taken out of thin air. I
doubt you have evidence in favour or against.


Honestly spoken: the world has other problems than such a pointless issue.

I introduced eggs, setuptools and zc.buildout within a bigger organization 
with several courses and hands-on-training. 'easy_install' is a well-known 
term right now and there is basically no need for renaming it - just for 
the sake of renaming it to something like 'pyegg' which is as pointless and 
generic as 'easy_install'. Leave things as they are - don't confuse people 
by renaming things - it's not worth the effort.


Andreas

pgpFYepLwVVMS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven]

-On [20080614 03:18], zooko ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>I said it was "too late", because there are already lots of people  
>worldwide who know the name "easy_install".  It would be costly to  
>them to change it -- they'll go looking for the new version of  
>easy_install someday and won't find it, stuff like that.

Nothing proper release notes and the likes cannot fix. Heck, you could
provide a symlink from easy_install to the new pyegg --or whatever the name
might be-- for a few releases and if it is easy_install that's being
invoked, you act accordingly. Or even a placeholder script invoking the
necessary things.

Also, your claim of 'lots of people worldwide' is taken out of thin air. I
doubt you have evidence in favour or against.

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven  / asmodai
イェルーン ラウフロック ヴァン デル ウェルヴェン
http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/ | GPG: 2EAC625B
Nothing is constant but change...
___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[zooko]

On Jun 13, 2008, at 5:48 PM, Ben Finney wrote:


zooko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:


While your reasons are good ones, Armin, it is too late to rename
easy_install.


I don't see why. Care to give some reasons of your own?


I said it was "too late", because there are already lots of people  
worldwide who know the name "easy_install".  It would be costly to  
them to change it -- they'll go looking for the new version of  
easy_install someday and won't find it, stuff like that.


On the other hand, if there is a strong desire on the parts of  
developers to change it, I won't object.


Regards,

Zooko

___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Ben Finney]

zooko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> While your reasons are good ones, Armin, it is too late to rename
> easy_install.

I don't see why. Care to give some reasons of your own?

As pointed out, the name 'easy_install' isn't strongly associated with
the concepts or other names within setuptools. Changing it isn't
something to do overnight, nor in a single step, but there's plenty of
flux in setuptools at the moment and it's far from "too late" to
change the name of this program.

-- 
 \"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it |
  `\   correct, not tried it." -- Donald Knuth, 1977-03-29 |
_o__)  |
Ben Finney

___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[James William Pye]

On Jun 13, 2008, at 4:59 AM, Armin Ronacher wrote:


Currently the egg installation script is called "easy_install".  I  
would propose
to rename it to something like "pyegg" or something similar.   
Mainly because
"easy_install" is a very generic name and doesn't include anything  
related with

python in the name which causes confusion.

Additionally if easy_install gets an uninstallation feature the  
name is wrong too.


-0 from me.

While your reasons are good ones, Armin, it is too late to rename  
easy_install.



+1 for a rename. Of course, start throwing a deprecation warning  
before removing

the command entirely. :(
___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[zooko]

On Jun 13, 2008, at 4:59 AM, Armin Ronacher wrote:


Currently the egg installation script is called "easy_install".  I  
would propose
to rename it to something like "pyegg" or something similar.   
Mainly because
"easy_install" is a very generic name and doesn't include anything  
related with

python in the name which causes confusion.

Additionally if easy_install gets an uninstallation feature the  
name is wrong too.


-0 from me.

While your reasons are good ones, Armin, it is too late to rename  
easy_install.


Regards,

Zooko

___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

[Distutils] [issue24] Rename easy_install

[Armin Ronacher]

New submission from Armin Ronacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

Currently the egg installation script is called "easy_install".  I would propose
to rename it to something like "pyegg" or something similar.  Mainly because
"easy_install" is a very generic name and doesn't include anything related with
python in the name which causes confusion.

Additionally if easy_install gets an uninstallation feature the name is wrong 
too.

--
messages: 47
nosy: aronacher
priority: wish
status: unread
title: Rename easy_install

___
Setuptools tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig