<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
why does that have to be in setuptools ?!<br>
<br>
if we want a new light system to begin with, shouldn't it be far
more sustainable to use just implementations of the new standards
rather than leaving all of setuptools<br>
<br>
there is no viable way in setuptools to get rid of the legacy ina
sane and fast manner, it would drag out over years<br>
<br>
and both distutils and setuptools are very very sub-par from the
maintenance perspective<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/21/2015 06:42 PM, Chris Barker
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALGmxEKMx7n8oAr24wGZiJ05qokwscUwyDbZqQkEgt37XD4FMA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">This is kind-of related to the othe thread:
<div><br>
</div>
<div>"Remove distutils, was: ..."</div>
<div><br>
<div>But more specific, so I thought I'd start a new one.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Here are my thoughts:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We had distutils -- there was a lot it didn't do that the
"Masses" needed, so setuptools was born. It proved to be
useful to a lot of people, and grew a large userbase....</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But a lot was "wrong" with setuptools -- most prominently
(in my mind anyway) that it put too many kind-sorta
orthogonal stuff into one package: building, installing,
distributing, managing version, managing dependencies,
managing non-python resources, (and others??). And we didn't
like how easy-install installed things :-)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So distribute, and pip, and wheel, and now a new backward
compatible setuptools was born.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But we still have a bunch of should be orthogonal stuff
tangled up together. In particular, I find that I often find
easy-install getting invoked when I don't want ot to, and I
get those darn eggs scattered all over the place, and
easy_install.pth, and ????</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think if I am really careful about what I invoke when,
this could be avoided, but the reality is that I've been
dealing with this for years, and am trying desperately to do
things the "right, modern" way, and I still get ugliness. I
seriously doubt that I am alone.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So -- here's my thought:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think we have it pretty well mapped out what
functionality belongs where:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>one system for building packages (setuptools?)</div>
<div>one system for installing packages and managing
dependencies (pip)</div>
<div>one system (really standard) for metadata and
distributing packages (wheel)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>[I'm just whipping this out off the top of my head, I'm
sure we'd need to more clearly define what belongs where]</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So why not have a setuptools-lite that only does the
building? We need to keep the full over-burdened setuptools
around, because lot sof folks are using those features. But
for those of us that are doing something fairly new, and
don't want to use stuff that setuptools "shouldn't" be
doing, I'd love to have a setuptools-lite that only did what
I really need, and was guaranteed NOT to accidentally
introduce easy_install, etc...</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This seems to me to be a way to go forward -- as it is
we'll have people using setuptools features that they
"shouldn't" forever, and never be able to move to a cleaner
system.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Or maybe a flag:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>import setuptools</div>
<div>setuptools.use_only_modern()</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>That would make the dependencies easier -- i.e. pip
depends on some of setuptools being there -- hard to say
that it needs either setuptools OR setuptools_lite.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Maybe I'm missing something here, but if the goal is for
there to be one way to do things, let's have a tool chain
that only does things one way.....</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Chris</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-- <br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_signature"><br>
Christopher Barker, Ph.D.<br>
Oceanographer<br>
<br>
Emergency Response Division<br>
NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice<br>
7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax<br>
Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Chris.Barker@noaa.gov" target="_blank">Chris.Barker@noaa.gov</a></div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Distutils-SIG@python.org">Distutils-SIG@python.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig">https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>