[Python-Dev] Package install failures in 2.6.3

[Tarek Ziadé]

On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:
> On Oct 5, 2009, at 8:22 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>
>>> I'm not proposing to debate the merits of all of the options here.
>>> However, if a 2.6.4 release is to be pushed out quickly for other
>>> reasons,  a one-time window of opportunity would be available and it
>>> would be prudent to at least consider the possibility of a distutils fix.
>>
>> What about a Setuptools release, with the proper fix ?
>
> If setuptools can be made to work with Python 2.6.3 /and/ earlier versions
> of Python 2.6.x, then it should be patched and an update released.  If not,
> then perhaps we should revert the change in a quick Python 2.6.4.

It's technically possible to fix Setuptools. We did this fix on Distribute, and
the patch is 2 lines long.

But it's just a matter of having the maintainer doing it. A few months ago we
couldn't make him fix and release the bug that made setuptools fail
with svn 1.6, and the year before it took several months to get it
fixed for svn 1.5
(a one line, not risky change !!!)

That's why we have forked and created Distribute, to provide bug fixes.

If PJE is not concerned anymore by the maintenance, imho he should let someone
that is willing to do it take over the maintenance of his package to
fix this (and the other problems). That is not a new problem.

Beware that I don't want to run in any new vicious thread here: I had
my share of those.

So about taking over Setuptools maintenance :
1/ I am not saying it should be me, and I am not saying that I am
offended that PJE didn't open the maintenance of setuptools to me.  I
think he should trust the community and let the maintenance of
setuptools be done by all the people that are actively working on the topic.

2/ No, as someone told me in IRC, that's not an evil plan of mine to
make people switch to Distribute. This is not in our interest, it's a
loss-loss situation.

Now I am strongly opposed to revert any bug fix change in Distutils
just because it breaks Setuptools, which is unmaintained since a year.

We have been struggling over a year with this issue. And we are still
struggling because we have to work in a fork to try to provide solutions
for the community, with a lot of bootstrapping issues.

Now I am astonished that we are talking about reverting changes in
Distutils that were done for bugfixes, for a third party package that
does monkey
patches on Distutils.

If this choice wins here, it means that setuptools and the stdlib are
tied together, and that the setuptools package should be integrated to
the stdlib *immediatly*.

Tarek