At 02:30 PM 9/27/2007 -0400, Yannick Gingras wrote:

"Phillip J. Eby" <pje@telecommunity.com> writes:

...

Distribution would be best; I don't want setuptools invoking executables on the off-chance that they're installed. It would add overhead to every operation. To be considered for inclusion in setuptools proper, I would need it to perform all its operations without needing an external program, and a reference to the file format it's using so I don't end up having to support it with no idea how it works.

For separately distributed file-finder plugins, it's okay for them to depend on external programs, since presumably a user who installs the plugin has the needed programs.

Fair enough. The git file format is a bit ugly and using git to parse it is probably the most sensible thing to do. External distribution is a perfectly reasonable solution.

Is there a naming convention for SCM plugins? Could Setuptools add a list of available plugins on it's website? I know there is a pluging for Mercurial:

http://cheeseshop.python.org/pypi/hg.setuptools/

But without a naming conventions, I would not be likely to find a plugin for a particular SCM even it exists.

Well, you can search for your SCM on PyPI, which works for Mercurial and bzr, at least.