+1 from me. My intention when marking the PEP as provisional was never
to block on its inclusion in setuptools, but to ensure that some
*other* build backends had implemented the PEP successfully, and this
has now happened.
Paul
On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 at 11:20, Bernat Gabor <gaborjbernat@gmail.com> wrote:
Stéphane Bidoul raised the question of whether we should mark PEP-660 (editable installs) final now or not. Me and Paul Moore have differing opinions on this so we're calling a vote of the members.
Reasons to mark it final as Stéphane said: PEP 660 has now been implemented in pip, flit, enscons, hatchling, pdm, poetry (merged by not released).
Reasons why I think we should not mark it final: You’ll only find out what gaps the standard has once it’s widely used. IMHO enough is not a few backends that are overall not that often used adopts it. But enough should be when the majority of the projects using it adopt it (e.g. 80% of projects). Now I can see this by either setuptools implementing it or people moving away from using setuptools in time. Most projects that currently implement the standard don’t provide a generic build framework, as setuptools does, but instead only a subset so they don’t necessarily expose the current standards potential issues (think e.g. flit is restricting itself currently to purely toml configuration driven and avoids having a build step).
I'll start the voting, from my side it's -1, aka keep it provisional for now.
All the best,
Bernat
PyPA-Committers mailing list -- pypa-committers@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to pypa-committers-leave@python.org
Member address: p.f.moore@gmail.com
PyPA-Committers mailing list -- pypa-committers@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to pypa-committers-leave@python.org
Member address: python@ml.ganssle.io