[Distutils] YAGNI extras and tests_require

[Phillip J. Eby]

At 10:52 AM 10/22/2006, Jim Fulton wrote:

>I'd like to call "Ya aint gonna need it" on the extras feature of setuptools.
>
>As far as I can tell, extras are just a way to avoid fine-grained packages.
>Is this benefit worth the complexity?  I don't think so.  It violates
>"There's Only One Way To Do It" and increases the complexity of setuptools.
>
>Setuptools is wonderful but it is complex.  I think it would be helpful to
>make it simpler and I really don't see a need for extras.
>
>I think a similar argument could be made against the tests_require feature.
>(In the presence of the extras feature, it's puzzling that this isn't
>handled as an extra.)

tests_require and setup_requires don't get installed; extras 
are.  Also, the mechanism involved is different; you have to have a 
valid distribution object in order to reference its extras, and when 
tests_require is being processed, you may not have that yet.  (I 
don't know without looking at the code, and I'm on the road right now.)

Anyway, I don't see tests_require as having any relationship to 
extras; many packages don't have installable tests, for example.