TL;DR: OK to archive this mailing list? Reply by Aug 30th.
Below: Context, Proposal, Reasoning, and timeline.
*Context*:
For multiple years now, we've been advising users to use setuptools and
to move away from using distutils. There has been a long standing
plan [^1] to vendor distutils into setuptools to allow it to evolve
independently of the Python standard library and to allow for removal of
distutils from the Python standard library.
Recently, setuptools adopted the distutils [^2] which, as far as I can
tell, starts the long process of removing distutils from the Python
standard library. PEP 517 [^3] also removed the special status of
distutils/setuptools as the only pipeline that can be used for
generating distributions for Python projects.
For some time now, "distutils" has not been a "primary" tool in the
broader Python Packaging ecosystem, with setuptools being an overall
superior tool that also has a good interoperability story with the other
Python packaging tooling. This is acknowledged in the description of
this mailing list as:
> Now, it's better described as the "packaging interoperability SIG",
> where issues that cut across different parts of the Python packaging
> ecosystem get discussed and resolved.
However, this mailing list is no longer serving this stated role either,
with the Packaging category on discuss.python.org becoming the primary
location for packaging tool interoperability discussions.
Over the last year, the Packaging category on discuss.python.org had 841
active topics, with only 40 topics with 3 or fewer responses. [^5]
In the last 100 days, the Packaging category on discuss.python.org has
had 91 active topics. More than 10 PEPs have been discussed in the
Packaging category on discuss.python.org in the last 100 days.
Over the last year, distutils-sig had ~109 active threads, with
(based on a quick skim) most having 3 or fewer responses/posters. [^4]
In the last 100 days, distutils-sig has had 32 active threads (at least
7 of these have the same subject as another thread with Re:/Fwd: added).
There has been only 1 PEP-related feedback discussion on distutils-sig
in the last year. Most of the other threads are user support requests or
announcements.
*Proposal*:
I suggest that, one month from now, we stop posting to this list
(distutils-sig(a)python.org) and archive it.
*Reasoning*:
I think we do not use this mailing list for its dedicated purpose, and
it does not serve any secondary function that isn't better served by a
different communication channel already.
(1) this mailing list is no longer the primary location for
interoperability discussions
(2) we have better channels for user support requests (such as
issue trackers of various projects, packaging-problems etc.)
(3) we have other channels for making announcements (such as the
pypi-announce mailing list, the PyPA twitter account,
discuss.python.org etc.)
*Timeline*:
Here's what I suggest, and what I will carry out if there is no
objection.
In one month, on August 30th, I would verify that no one has argued here
for why this mailing list should not be closed/archived.
Or, even if a few people have objected to closing the list, I would
check for rough consensus, especially of people who are doing SOMETHING
productive having to do with Python Packaging (such as maintainers of
Python packages, maintainers of Python Packaging tooling, folks running
key infrastructure, etc.).
Then, I would request the list administrators to post a final message
to this list (marking its close and suggesting that people use
discuss.python.org instead) and, to archive this mailing list. This
would leave archives available at their current URLs, so links, browsing
and search would work.
And finally, I would look through relevant documentation within PyPA
repositories to see what needs updating (READMEs and so on pointing to
the old list), and submit pull requests.
I appreciate the work folks here have done to carry forward Python
packaging over the past 21 years of this mailing list. I don't mean to
diminish that or to insult anyone here. I want to help us out, and I
think closing this list will help focus our energy better. But I am
open to hearing that I am wrong.
Realizing-that-distutils-sig-is-older-than-me-ly,
Pradyun Gedam
[^1]:
https://www.pypa.io/en/latest/roadmap/#vendor-distutils-into-setuptools
[^2]: https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/pull/2143
[^3]: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0517/
[^4]:
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/distutils-sig@python.org/latest?count…
[^5]: https://discuss.python.org/c/packaging/14/l/top/yearly?order=posts
Hello
I have a project with a fairly involved build process where we generate
C++ via a python-clang-based code analyser, generates Python bindings
for the resulting C++ API with SWIG, and finally compile and link to
create various .so's and .py files.
I'd like to package things up with a setup.py script, but from what i
have read, it looks like distutils expects to compile, link and run
swig itself, using distutils.core.setup()'s ext_modules arg?
Is there a way to write setup.py so that it instead runs an external
command (e.g. 'cd foo && make all') when it is asked to build?
Thanks for any help,
- Jules
--
http://op59.net
Not sure exactly what broke in the chain of my toolset for building reportlab. I have a github action which fails with
the message
ls: cannot access /opt/python/cp27-cp27mu/bin: No such file or directory
so because I have fixed the checkout version of the multibuild area itself I suppose that something else changed/updated
since the last build which was successful on Jan 22.
has multibuild / manylinux decided to abandon the python 2.7 version or is there something I can do to get my builds
going again?
As an aside is it worth trying to fix the version of multibuild or should I just assume that most of the variability
will come from the many docker layers that seem to be used.
> Digest: sha256:efc8a9832a07678fc17026ab35aa6444c02a665ccd5e6552c90d036045d78b17
> Status: Downloaded newer image for quay.io/pypa/manylinux2010_x86_64:latest
> + break
> quay.io/pypa/manylinux2010_x86_64:latest
> + '[' 5 -eq 0 ']'
> + return 0
> + docker run --rm -e 'BUILD_COMMANDS=build_wheel reportlab' -e PYTHON_VERSION=2.7 -e MB_PYTHON_VERSION=2.7 -e UNICODE_WIDTH=32 -e BUILD_COMMIT=HEAD -e CONFIG_PATH=.travis-config.sh -e ENV_VARS_PATH= -e WHEEL_SDIR=wheelhouse -e MANYLINUX_URL= -e BUILD_DEPENDS= -e USE_CCACHE= -e REPO_DIR=reportlab -e PLAT=x86_64 -e MB_ML_VER=2010 -v /home/runner/work/reportlab-mirror/reportlab-mirror:/io -v /home/runner:/parent-home quay.io/pypa/manylinux2010_x86_64 /io/multibuild/docker_build_wrap.sh
> ls: cannot access /opt/python/cp27-cp27mu/bin: No such file or directory
> Error: Process completed with exit code 2.
--
Robin Becker
Thanks Jeremy, I will check those out. I thought that maybe there was a
simple flag I could pass in to python -m build that would allow me to
override a value in setup.cfg, but I should probably read through
PEP517/PEP518 in full to get a better overview of this process.
>
>
> From: Jeremy Stanley <fungi(a)yuggoth.org>
> Date: Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 3:26 PM
> Subject: [Distutils] Re: Building Pre-releases with setup.cfg
> To: <distutils-sig(a)python.org>
>
>
> On 2021-02-09 09:48:31 -0500 (-0500), Matthew Gilbert wrote:
> > I'm wondering if it is possibly to build pre-release tags using only a
> > setup.cfg file? From
> >
> https://setuptools.readthedocs.io/en/latest/userguide/distribution.html#tag…
> > it seems like this is possible via setup.py, but I was unable to find
> > anything related to setup.cfg.
> [...]
> > Possibly this can be configured using the --config-setting flag but I
> have
> > been unable to get this to work or find any documentation on it. Ideally
> I
> > would be able to pass a string so I can build a dev version for testing
> > uploads to Test PyPI, e.g. "0.0.1devHASH"
> [...]
>
> I'm probably misunderstanding your question, but typically I've seen
> something like PBR or Setuptools-SCM used to automatically calculate
> the version at dist build time (including inferring something based
> on the number of commits on the branch since the last tag, embedding
> abbreviated Git commit IDs, or whatever).
> --
> Jeremy Stanley
> --
> Distutils-SIG mailing list -- distutils-sig(a)python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to distutils-sig-leave(a)python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/distutils-sig.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/distutils-sig@python.org/message/PUAS…
>
Hi all,
I'm wondering if it is possibly to build pre-release tags using only a
setup.cfg file? From
https://setuptools.readthedocs.io/en/latest/userguide/distribution.html#tag…
it seems like this is possible via setup.py, but I was unable to find
anything related to setup.cfg. An abridged version of my setup.cfg file
looks like
[metadata]
name = tester_project
version = attr: tester_project.__version__
[bdist_wheel]
universal=1
[build-system]
requires =
setuptools >= 40.9.0
wheel
build-backend = setuptools.build_meta
Which I was building using
$ python -m build --sdist --wheel --outdir dist
Possibly this can be configured using the --config-setting flag but I have
been unable to get this to work or find any documentation on it. Ideally I
would be able to pass a string so I can build a dev version for testing
uploads to Test PyPI, e.g. "0.0.1devHASH"
Any info or references is much appreciated!
Thanks,
Matt
