Hi folks,
A conversation with Donald today made me realise I should explicitly
pass along links to some recent PSF blog posts regarding PSF
membership and other matters, as they're likely to be relevant to
distutils-sig members that may not be paying attention to the PSF
specific information distribution channels.
The most immediately relevant one is the instructions for registering
as a Contributing Member:
http://pyfound.blogspot.com.au/2015/02/enroll-as-psf-voting-member.html
For folks …
[View More]that aren't already aware, the Python Software Foundation
switched to an open membership model last year, where anyone is free
to register as a Basic Member on python.org, and active contributors
to the Python community are invited to participate more directly in
the operation of the organisation (which, amongst other things, runs
pypi.python.org). Many of the folks here will qualify for
self-certification as PSF Contributing Members if you choose to do so
:)
Historically, that higher level of engagement has consisted primarily
of electing the Board of Directors each year and voting on whether or
not to approve new Sponsor Members, but we're looking to change that
as well, firstly by proposing the adoption a more open strategic
decision making model akin to the PEP process (Let's Make Decisions
Together: http://pyfound.blogspot.com.au/2015/03/personal-opinion-i-think-its-always.…),
and secondly by revamping the old nominated membership system into a
new public recognition program for folks that have made significant
contributions to the Python community(The PSF Fellow Recognition
Program: http://pyfound.blogspot.com.au/2015/03/for-shes-jolly-good-psf-fellow.html).
Generally speaking, in the absence of legal or community Code of
Conduct concerns, the PSF will keep its nose out of distutils-sig's
business, but in this case, I'm issuing an invitation for
distutils-sig members that choose to do so to come participate more.
If there are any other groups you think might benefit from a more
explicit invitation, please feel free to forward this message on.
If you're curious about what the PSF does in general (aside from
hosting pypi.python.org and the various other *.python.org services),
I also suggest checking out some of the other posts on the blog.
Regards,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan(a)gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
[View Less]
I was wondering when someone would attempt this. Simple .ini file and
some conventions, and you have a pip-installable wheel. No
bdist_wheel, setup.py, MANIFEST or setuptools involved. I like it.
Still alpha/beta.
https://github.com/takluyver/flit
This is a break-out thread from the centi-thread that spawned about
setup-requires.
d2to1 defined some metadata keys in setup.cfg,in particular 'name' and
'requires-dist'. Confusing 'requires-dist' contains the
'install_requires' one might use with setuptools' setup() function.
Since the declarative setup-requires concept also involves putting
dependencies in setup.cfg (but setup_requires rather than
install_requires), I followed the naming convention d2to1 had started.
But - all the …
[View More]reviewers (and I agree) think this is confusing and
non-obvious.
Since d2to1 is strictly a build-time thing - it reflects the keys into
the metadata and thus your egg-info/requires.txt is unaltered in
output, I think its reasonable to argue that we don't need to be
compatible with it.
OTOH folk using d2to1 would not gain the benefits that declarative
setup-requires may offer in setuptools // pip.
What do folk think?
-Rob
--
Robert Collins <rbtcollins(a)hp.com>
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
[View Less]