Re: [Distutils] Setuptools should not depend on setuptools.
At 08:38 AM 3/12/2009 +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 08:35, Lennart Regebro
wrote: On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 03:38, P.J. Eby
wrote: That's not a catch 22. You simply run a 2.x setup.py with options that cause the conversion to take place before running 3.x over the converted result. Now you have a 3.x version.
How do you run this? What is the command you would use?
Eh, whatever, ignore the question. I'm tired of arguing.
I'm not aware anyone was arguing. I'm simply trying to understand what the problem is. There appears to be some unstated assumptions that we don't share, and I've been trying to find out what they are. I've suggested that perhaps my assumption that both the 2.x and 3.x interpreters are available was the one we don't share, but you didn't comment on that. Another possible assumption we don't share might be that a single source distribution with a single, "bilingual" (biversional?) setup.py is required. (I assume this is not required... but then again, it could perhaps be worked around by having a version-detecting setup.py that then invokes a setup2.py or setup3.py, accordingly.) So I still don't know what the problem is, because you've not exposed all of your assumptions (as far as I can tell), nor corrected any of mine.
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 17:51, P.J. Eby
I'm not aware anyone was arguing.
OK, wrong word "explaining" then. :)
I've suggested that perhaps my assumption that both the 2.x and 3.x interpreters are available was the one we don't share, but you didn't comment on that.
I though I did comment on the question about only Python 3 being available. And easy_install -U will not work for python 3 if you need to use Python 2 for the first step of the installation. And buildout sometimes requires updates to distutils, which currently is done automatically, that won't work. And installation on Python 3 will be a complicated multi-step affair.
Another possible assumption we don't share might be that a single source distribution with a single, "bilingual" (biversional?) setup.py is required.
Well, no, but that is a relatively minor problem. Unless you suggest that we have complety separate setups, with one python 2.x install and setup command, and one python 3 install and setup command. That seems kinda silly, IMO.
So I still don't know what the problem is, because you've not exposed all of your assumptions (as far as I can tell), nor corrected any of mine.
I don't have many assumptions. I just want the setuptools install and tests to work as expected under both python2 and python3. And that means that python3.0 setup.py install should work. And python3.0 setup.py test would be nice too, although it's less important. -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista. http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64
participants (2)
-
Lennart Regebro
-
P.J. Eby