On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Holth <dholth@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Brett Cannon <brett@python.org> wrote:
I'm going to be pushing an update to one of my projects to PyPI this week and so I figured I could use this opportunity to help with patches to the User Guide's packaging tutorial.
But to do that I wanted to ask what the current best practices are.
* Are we even close to suggesting wheels for source distributions?
No, wheels don't replace source distributions at all. They just let you install something without having to have whatever built the wheel from its sdist. It is currently nice to have them available.
Then I'm thoroughly confused since the Wheel PEP says in its rationale that "Python needs a package format that is easier to install than sdist". That would suggest a wheel would work for a source distribution and replace sdist zip/tar files. If wheels aren't going to replace what sdist spits out as the installation file format of choice for pip what is it for, just binary files alone? -Brett
I'd like to see an ambitious person begin uploading wheels that have no traditional sdist.
* Are we promoting (weakly, strongly?) the signing of distributions yet?
No change.
* Are we saying "use setuptools" for everyone, or still only if you need it (asking since there is a stub about installing setuptools but the simple example doesn't have a direct need for it ATM, but could use find_packages() and such)?
Setuptools is the preferred distutils-derived system. distutils should no longer be considered morally superior.
The MEBS idea, or a simple setup.py emulator and a contract with the installer on which commands it will actually call, will eventually let you do a proper job of choosing build systems.