On Sep 20, 2005, at 5:44 PM, Steve Holden wrote:
Thomas Heller wrote:
I'm slowly getting tired maintaining py2exe. It is far from perfect, although it has interesting features (I would say). The problem, apart from the work, is that it is good enough for me - I can do everything that I need with it. But I assume I use far less libaries than other Python programmers, so a lot of bugs will never bite me. It is also interesting that the recently introduced bundle-files option, which allows to build single-file exes has gained a lot of interest - although the ONLY use case (so far) I have myself for it is to implement inproc COM servers which will compatible with Python clients (and other Python inproc COM servers) because of the total isolation of the Python VMs. Is anyone interested in taking over the maintainance, documentation, and further development? Should py2exe be integrated into another, larger, package? Pywin32 comes to mind, but also Philip Eby's setuptools (that's why I post to distutils-sig as well)...
Ignoring all the philosophical questions I'd like to thank you for all your hard work on py2exe over the years, which has benefited the Windows Python community immeasurably.
I'd like to thank you as well. Although I'm primarily a Mac OS X (and various other *nix-ish things) user myself, I have used py2exe on several occasions to package a commercial product and to give various one-off applications to clients. py2exe was also a large inspiration for py2app (which I have been neglecting lately). py2exe (and py2app) currently do everything I need them do (albeit with a little prodding), so that's why I've done so little with it in the past few months. I hope that the packager-future will be largely setuptools based and that the various platform-specific packagers will share a lot more code in the future (setuptools, modulegraph, etc.), making maintenance easier and more fun for everyone. This was my primary use case when I was initially discussing the egg spec with PJE back around pycon-time (though I have been unfortunately useless implementing and evolving it). Right now, I think the packagers and the packages are at odds, because the packagers need metadata that the packages don't provide (in a pre-setuptools universe)... so right now users (or the packagers) need to know a lot of magic incantations to make the various complicated Python packages work, where with setuptools based packages the magic incantations are built-in :) -bob