That's not a bad idea for certain kinds of metadata--version/vcs info
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:41 PM, PJ Eby <firstname.lastname@example.org
>> > I might be confused; I haven't been following the goings-on of late with
>> > distutils2. At one point, I thought the plan was not to bless or
>> > include dependency-managing installers with the stdlib, or something
>> > like that. i.e., I thought the plan wasn't to support or bless
>> > full-service tools like buildout, easy_install, or pip, or anything
>> > comparable to them.
>> Right, yeah, the plans in this area were fluid for awhile, but the
>> eventual conclusion was that the stdlib should have a command-line
>> utility capable of installing packages with dependencies. That exists in
>> default branch now; it's called pysetup. It doesn't have nearly all the
>> features of easy_install, buildout, or pip, but it can install packages
>> from an index with deps.
> In any case, it still doesn't change the part where it's a good idea to ship
> a static setup.cfg, with hooks only needing to run on the sdist-building
> machine, unless they are actually part of the build process. There are use
> cases for calculated data to be in the initial setup.cfg, where the
> calculation machinery doesn't need to be on the target (like generating the
> file list or version from revision control info). So, a setup_requires (or
> maybe better named "build_requires") would still be helpful, but probably
> shouldn't be used for setup.cfg stability.