I remember doing this pull request over a decade ago:
https://github.com/broadinstitute/xtermcolor/pull/12/files#diff-60f61ab7a8d1910d86d9fda2261620314edcae5894d5aaa236b821c7256badd7
to a project that used setuptools + something to download setuptools
to be able to use it.
I fail to see how
On Monday, 3 June 2024 16:27:29 CEST Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> In the interim the packaging toolchain evolved to the point that having
> distutils in the stdlib was no longer of general benefit, and in fact made
> things worse because people had grown accustomed to things like `from
> distutils
It's not an accurate characterization that distutils was removed simply because
it wasn't maintained.
It was as fragile library, and it was difficult to make any changes to it
because a number of things had implemented themselves by reaching into
distutils and randomly monkeypatching various
Consider that they are the same people that recently removed
"distutils" from the standard library, because it was not maintained.
When they have well enough funding to assign someone to maintain it,
instead of relying on external projects to install packages.
I think they are in the bubble of
On Monday, 27 May 2024 04:07:34 CEST Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
> While there are technical concerns on both sides, socially I think the
> Python community isn't that interested in outside perspectives.
I managed to dig up these notes from the packaging summit at PyCon:
Overall, I think that's quite reasonable, but I think I need to pick at the
both sides way this is framed.
I don't recall anyone here suggesting that it's a problem is Python upstream
wants to ship Python binaries. While I think that there are issues with some
of the upstream design choices,
I happen to be subscribed here, so figured I'd comment :)
FWIW I think the way the discussions are going... really in both locations.. is
needlessly taking shots at each other.
I've commented on discuss.python.org, but figured I'd repeat myself here.
I think the way these discussions devolve
Hi Ian (2024.05.26_01:33:09_+)
> I am puzzled about some of the responses there, how can anyone expect to
> randomly update packages on the system using pip and not have it go wrong
> on any distribution? This is why things like pipenv exist.
People don't understand that stuff until they dig
That's just too crazy to let change a core system dependency so easily
from outside.
I'll just say that the equal amount of FUD and ranting can be easily
generated abotu Debian or even just about Debian Python packaging.
--
WBR, wRAR
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hi,
I have always found most of issues mentioned in the thread a welcome change
instead, and if anything the far superior ability of apt to automatically
remove all the installed dependencies in case of the removal of a package
compared to the complete inability of pip has always left me in
On Sunday, 26 May 2024 03:33:09 CEST Ian Norton wrote:
> I am puzzled about some of the responses there, how can anyone expect to
> randomly update packages on the system using pip and not have it go wrong
> on any distribution? This is why things like pipenv exist.
Or whatever today's tool is
12 matches
Mail list logo
