conda-forge/conda-smithy

| Src: https://github.com/conda-forge/conda-smithy
| Homepage: https://conda-forge.github.io/ :

"conda-forge is a github organization containing repositories of conda recipes. Thanks to some awesome continuous integration providers (AppVeyor, CircleCI and TravisCI), each repository, also known as a feedstock, automatically builds its own recipe in a clean and repeatable way on Windows, Linux and OSX"

https://conda-forge.github.io/feedstocks.html

so, for psutil-feedstock:

https://github.com/conda-forge/psutil-feedstock

- https://github.com/conda-forge/psutil-feedstock/blob/master/recipe/meta.yaml
- https://github.com/conda-forge/psutil-feedstock/blob/master/appveyor.yml
- https://github.com/conda-forge/psutil-feedstock/blob/master/ci_support/run_docker_build.sh
- https://github.com/conda-forge/psutil-feedstock/blob/master/.travis.yml

https://github.com/conda-forge/conda-smithy/tree/master/conda_smithy/templates

On Thursday, May 26, 2016, Robert T. McGibbon <rmcgibbo@gmail.com> wrote:
I want to get something setup that would allow people to only need to upload
> a source release to PyPI and then have wheels automatically built for them
> (but not mandate that- Projects that wish it should always be able to control
> their wheel generation). I don’t know what that would specifically look
> like, if someone is motivated to work on it I’m happy to help figure out what
> it should look like and provide guidance where I can, otherwise it’ll wait
> until I get around to it.

One first step towards this that's a natural follow-on to the manylinux work
might be to define a overall build configuration file / format and process for
automating the whole wheel build cycle (i'm thinking of something modeled after
conda-build) that would, among other things

for potentially multiple versions of python:
- run `pip wheel` (or setu.py bdist_wheel) to compile the wheel
- run `auditwheel` (linux) or `delocate` (osx) to bundle any external libraries

-Robert

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Donald Stufft <donald@stufft.io> wrote:

> On May 26, 2016, at 2:41 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Daniel Holth <dholth@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Maybe there could be a way to say "the most recent release that has a wheel
>> for my platform". That would help with the problem of binaries not being
>> available concurrently with a new source distribution.
>
> Yes, that would certainly help get over some of the immediate problems.
>
> Sorry for my ignorance - but does ``--only-binary`` search for an
> earlier release with a binary or just bomb out if the latest release
> does not have a binary?   It would also be good to have a flag to say
> "if this is pure Python go ahead and use the source, otherwise error".
>   Otherwise I guess we'd have to rely on everyone with a pure Python
> package generating wheels.

I believe it would find the latest version that has a wheel available,
I could be misremembering though.

>
> It would be very good to work out a plan for new Python releases as
> well.  We really need to get wheels up to pypi a fair while before the
> release date, and it's easy to forget to do that, because, at the
> moment, we don't have much testing infrastructure to make sure that a
> range of wheel installs are working OK.
>

I want to get something setup that would allow people to only need to upload
a source release to PyPI and then have wheels automatically built for them
(but not mandate that- Projects that wish it should always be able to control
their wheel generation). I don’t know what that would specifically look
like, if someone is motivated to work on it I’m happy to help figure out what
it should look like and provide guidance where I can, otherwise it’ll wait
until I get around to it.


Donald Stufft



_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig



--
-Robert