Mailman 3 May 2009 - Distutils-SIG

Re: [Distutils] RFC : PEP 376 - egg.info
by P.J. Eby 05 May '09

05 May '09

At 12:03 PM 5/3/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: >The name of each file will have to be normalized: all upper case with >no extensions. > >Any opinions ? I don't see any point to the normalization. However, being able to install arbitrary files in .egg-info is currently supported by setuptools, and that capability is used by e.g. the EggTranslations project. I would therefore suggest that perhaps the ability to specify file trees for egg-info inclusion would be better, if the goal is to eventually replace setuptools.

3 7

Re: [Distutils] RFC : PEP 376 - egg.info
by P.J. Eby 04 May '09

04 May '09

At 12:50 AM 5/5/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: >On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 7:51 PM, P.J. Eby <pje(a)telecommunity.com> wrote: > > At 06:01 PM 5/4/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:48 PM, P.J. Eby <pje(a)telecommunity.com> wrote: > >> >> > I don't see any point to the normalization. > >> >> > >> >> To avoid different naming conventions like: > >> >> > >> >> PKG-INFO, requires.txt, SOURCES.txt > >> > > >> > And the problem with that is...? > >> > >> inconsistency, but right, it makes no sense if any file/dir can be added > >> there. > >> > >> What about SOURCES.txt btw ? What is the reason to add it ? > > > > It's for source distributions. It allows them to be able to rebuild an > > identical source distribution in the absence of source control metadata. > > > > It's not really necessary for the installation process, although it's used > > to figure out which files to install if you use include_package_data=True. > > > >Any particular reason to call it "SOURCES.txt" ? > >Or we can call it MANIFEST (with '/'-separated relative path) I called it SOURCES.txt because MANIFEST is ambiguous as to what it's a manifest *of*, and also to distinguish it from any user-generated MANIFEST file. (If you don't know about those, you're probably going to break backward compatibility w/somebody, btw. Distutils usage is a diverse collection of nightmares.) Anyway, the name of the file has no bearing on what distutils does, unless distutils is trying to implement the same feature as setuptools: i.e. round-trippable sdists whose original manifest was generated via revision control.

1 0

Re: [Distutils] RFC : PEP 376 - egg.info
by P.J. Eby 04 May '09

04 May '09

At 05:23 PM 5/4/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: >There's another point I was thinking about in PEP 376 > >What about dropping the 'egg' part in 'PROJECT.egg-info' ? and >replace it with > >'PROJECT.info' > >(and make the 2.7 version compatible with PROJECT.egg-info ) > >I know it's a minor change, Actually, it's a major change, since it means dropping backward compatibility with existing tools.

5 7

Re: [Distutils] RFC : PEP 376 - egg.info
by P.J. Eby 04 May '09

04 May '09

At 06:01 PM 5/4/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: >On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:48 PM, P.J. Eby <pje(a)telecommunity.com> wrote: > >> > I don't see any point to the normalization. > >> > >> To avoid different naming conventions like: > >> > >> PKG-INFO, requires.txt, SOURCES.txt > > > > And the problem with that is...? > >inconsistency, but right, it makes no sense if any file/dir can be >added there. > >What about SOURCES.txt btw ? What is the reason to add it ? It's for source distributions. It allows them to be able to rebuild an identical source distribution in the absence of source control metadata. It's not really necessary for the installation process, although it's used to figure out which files to install if you use include_package_data=True.

2 1

Re: [Distutils] RFC : PEP 376 - egg.info
by P.J. Eby 04 May '09

04 May '09

At 06:31 PM 5/4/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: >Ok then, we will have to provide extra documentation to make people >understand that the '.egg-info' directory has absolutely nothing to do >with egg-the-format >but is rather a metadata container. On the contrary; .egg-info *is* an egg format; see the EggFormats documentation.

2 1

Re: [Distutils] Anyone stuck with easy_install / has .pth file issues -- this is for you!
by P.J. Eby 04 May '09

04 May '09

At 02:43 AM 5/4/2009 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: >Hi guys, > Just thought I'd might provide this script to fellow developers >which fixes .pth files (easy-install.pth / .egg was the prime target >-- see the comments for more details): ><http://yaneurabeya.livejournal.com/3929.html>. > Comments are more than welcome. As far as I can tell, it doesn't do anything that "easy_install -mxN" doesn't, although it appears to also convert paths of this form: /foo/bar/baz/foo/bar/spam into: ./baz./spam if I'm reading the code correctly. It also seems to have no protection against adding multiple versions of the same project to a .pth file, and to ignore development eggs, whether or not their directories still exist. In contrast, easy_install already removes non-existent files/directories whenever it touches easy_install.pth, and if you gave it a command line globbing the same files as this tool (i.e., just "easy_install [list of eggs]"), you'd at least end up without any duplicates in the .pth file. In short, AFAICT, you could replace the entire tool with a short note on how to accomplish the same things using easy_install, or by simply having it invoke easy_install internally.

2 2

Re: [Distutils] RFC : PEP 376 - egg.info
by P.J. Eby 04 May '09

04 May '09

At 05:54 PM 5/4/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: >2009/5/4 P.J. Eby <pje(a)telecommunity.com>: > > At 05:23 PM 5/4/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: > >> > >> There's another point I was thinking about in PEP 376 > >> > >> What about dropping the 'egg' part in 'PROJECT.egg-info' ? and replace it > >> with > >> > >> 'PROJECT.info' > >> > >> (and make the 2.7 version compatible with PROJECT.egg-info ) > >> > >> I know it's a minor change, > > > > Actually, it's a major change, since it means dropping backward > > compatibility with existing tools. > >well if Distutils 2.7 / 3.1 keeps backward compatibility like I said, >that would give 3 years for existing >tools to change.. Actually, writing '.info' files means that existing tools that expect .egg-info files or directories would stop working correctly *right away*.

1 0

Re: [Distutils] RFC : PEP 376 - egg.info
by P.J. Eby 04 May '09

04 May '09

At 07:34 PM 5/3/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: >2009/5/3 P.J. Eby <pje(a)telecommunity.com>: > > At 12:03 PM 5/3/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: > >> > >> The name of each file will have to be normalized: all upper case with > >> no extensions. > >> > >> Any opinions ? > > > > I don't see any point to the normalization. > >To avoid different naming conventions like: > >PKG-INFO, requires.txt, SOURCES.txt And the problem with that is...? > > However, being able to install > > arbitrary files in .egg-info is currently supported by setuptools, and that > > capability is used by e.g. the EggTranslations project. > > > > I would therefore suggest that perhaps the ability to specify > file trees for > > egg-info inclusion would be better, > >Are you talking about the directory that is built by egg_info in setuptools ? >or something else ? > >I mean, do we want to have subdirectories in .egg-info ? They already exist. > > if the goal is to eventually replace > > setuptools. > >The goal is to provide an install_egg_info command that can be configured >without the need to replace/override it. > >I guess, this can be done by taking part of the code done in setuptools >install_egg_info and provide a way for setuptools or another project >to add more files >through configuration. setuptools simply copies a pre-built egg-info directory from the source tree, that is built by the "egg_info" command. But people can also put arbitrary files and directories there, besides the contents built by the command itself. >Maybe this straight-forward sentence would work better: > >"let's add entry points in Distutils" ? +1

2 1

RFC : PEP 376 - egg.info
by Tarek Ziadé 04 May '09

04 May '09

Hi, I have reworked the PEP a little bit with people feedback. It needs more feedback : http://svn.python.org/projects/peps/trunk/pep-0376.txt - install/uninstall script I think the best solution is not to provide an install script since third-party tool do it. Furthermore, there's already the simplest install script available today: you can run "python setup.py install" on a given package so it gets installed. So what about adding just a global uninstall feature, that uninstalls the files installed for a package, using the record file, and let the third party tool have better features. - MANIFEST (SOURCES.txt) Ronald pointed out that it was not necessary to have a MANIFEST file included if we are going to have a RECORD file, as described in the PEP. The MANIFEST (which in a way is equivalent to SOURCES.txt pip or easy_install adds) is the list of source files, whereas the RECORD is the list if installed files (which might include more elements in case of compilations) What would be the interest of having the list of source files in egg-info ? Cheers Tarek -- Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org

4 20

Anyone stuck with easy_install / has .pth file issues -- this is for you!
by Garrett Cooper 04 May '09

04 May '09

Hi guys, Just thought I'd might provide this script to fellow developers which fixes .pth files (easy-install.pth / .egg was the prime target -- see the comments for more details): <http://yaneurabeya.livejournal.com/3929.html>. Comments are more than welcome. If I get any, I'll try to get back in touch sometime before next weekend (my weekdays have been extremely busy lately thanks to a pending work release schedule -_-...). HTH and thanks! -Garrett

1 0