-1 i share the sentiment, until its in wide use (and say for me personally im using it for pytest or work) -- Ronny Am 27.12.21 um 12:20 schrieb Bernat Gabor:
https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-660-editable-installs-for-pep-517-style-bui...
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 topypa-committers-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/pypa-committers.python.org/ Member address:opensource@ronnypfannschmidt.de