On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 21:52, P.J. Eby <pje@telecommunity.com> wrote:
Making a separate setup script for Python 3, at least for setuptools itself, if not having a general convention for that, since other packages may want to ship 2+3 stuff in the same package.
The typical setup script will look exactly the same under python 2 and python 3. There is no need for separate scripts in the general usecase. If you want to run 2to3 automatically, all you need to do is set up build_py_2to3 instead of build_2to3, that's the only difference, and that's easily fixed with a importexception. This goes pretty much for setuptools also. The setup3.py script will more or less work under python2 as well.
Or, in the alternative, using version testing in setup.py to run an alternate script for Python 3.
You don't need alternative scripts. setuptools is an exception, because it depends on itself, providing a catch22 situation.
I'm sorry you feel that way, as I've been *trying* to help. I just still don't get what the problem is. If I were porting setuptools to Python 3, I would *want* it to be circular, even if I had to hack on it a little at first. So I have a hard time understanding why you don't.
But it CAN NOT be circular under Python 3.
Maybe if I were trying to port it, I would get what problem you're having, or maybe I would just keep right on going and not notice. I don't know.
You will have it and I explained in the mail I sent as a start of this discussion. If I was unclear, please tell me what you didn't understand.
I've been trying to find out what exactly is stopping you and just can't seem to wrap my brain around it, any more than you've been able to about the reverse.
Mostly because your questions aren't pinpointing what you want to know.
It is pinpointing them exactly. I want to know why setuptools need to depends on setuptools. Your answer, as I can understand it is for convenience, and so that it serves as a test and example of it's own features. The fact that is serves as a test of it's own features is another pain. That was a big reason for the difficulty of porting, as even when testcases all passed, not all features worked. So I have to say that although it sounds reasonable, I think it's misguided.
Eggs are not easier to install, on the contrary, I have tried and failed a couple of times, and ended up using the source install instead.
...seems to indicate that your question was actually about eggs, not other-than-source distributions in general.
Which probably is why I said eggs...
The eggs are there, on the other hand, for ez_setup.py to download. (Not to mention buildout's bootstrap script, and other tools that depend on setuptools and want to have an automated overall install process.)
OK, I wonder if there is a way around that. If not, then as far as I can see, there is no way to install or develop with setuptools smoothly in Python 3. -- Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64