David Lyon wrote:
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 11:33:26 +0200, Tarek Ziadé
wrote: The first one who mentioned the idea was Eric IIRC, then Matthias and Tres worked on it.
Fine. They've been awfully quiet on distutils-sig lately :-)
Not so!
I just happen to be the one maintaining PEP 390 and I am trying to
collect > ideas here because I am maintaining Distutils so I'll be the one > will apply the changes there.
Sure. Well "collect" is a word that means different things to different people. I'd suggest some caution with using that word internationally because in some places it really can mean just outright theft. I'm very sure that that isn't how you want others to interpret your working process. Please.. don't use that word like that..
I'm sure no offense was intended. I don't see how we can all know all possible words that might be construed as offensive. But back to the matter at hand: I don't see what David is proposing as being radical or even different from what we've been discussing: a single static file that contains enough metadata to describe what's in a distribution. This file needs to be extensible. The Distutils-SIG approach has been incremental, adding small parts. It seems he wants to go "big bang". I think that's fine, but it will be more difficult to migrate to, I fear. He's proposing shipping an application in each distribution (his new setup.py) that processes that file to do installations. Sounds like a bootstrapper of sorts, and not so radical of an idea. This setup.py would use parts of existing distutils to do its work, where it can. I think a name other than setup.py would reduce confusion, but the idea seems practical. I'd be interested to hear how this would interact with PyPI and buildout. Eric.