On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 8:25 PM, P.J. Eby firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
At 08:10 PM 11/30/2009 +0100, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
2009/11/30 P.J. Eby email@example.com:
At 07:16 PM 11/30/2009 +0200, cool-RR wrote:
Well, that sort of sucks. And this is my motivation for bundling the `pkg_resources` from Distribute. The last thing I want is having my software fail for my users because of setuptools while I have Distribute installed locally and can't see the bug on my computer.
That's *really* unlikely. Setuptools' runtime functionality (i.e., pkg_resources) has an extremely low bug count. There have actually been more new pkg_resources bugs in Distribute's version of it (due to their changes) than there are outstanding reported bugs in the original pkg_resources.
As I said earlier, we've had our share of bugs because we needed to make Distribute work in some particular environments, but that was bootstraping issues we've fixed. And if we have more we will fix them and release another version of Distribute.
I wasn't criticizing Distribute - I was using Distribute to show just *how low* pkg_resources' bug count is.
(You know, this is now the third time in the last few days where you've interpreted my *positive* comments about your work (e.g. PEP 386) to someone else here as being some sort of criticism or argument with you.)
That was not a positive or negative comment about Distribute, but an incomplete statement.
So I've corrected this statement.
I agree that pkg_resources doesn't have a lot of bug. But I am also saying that Distribute's versions has less bugs.