On 6/21/12 11:55 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:

I think there is a misunderstanding of what bento is: bento is not a compiler or anything like that. It is a set of libraries that work together to configure, build and install a python project.

Concretely, in bento, there is
  -  a part that build a packager description (Distribution-like in distutils-parlance) from a bento.info (a bite like setup.cfg)
  - a set of tools of commands around this package description. 
  - a set of "backends" to e.g. use waf to build C extension with full and automatic dependency analysis (rebuild this if this other thing is out of date), parallel builds and configuration. Bento scripts build numpy more efficiently and reliable while being 50 % shorter than our setup.py.
  - a small library to build a distutils-compatible Distribution so that you can write a 3 lines setup.py that takes all its info from bento.info and allow for pip to work.

Now, you could produce a similar package description from the setup.cfg to be fed to bento, but I don't really see the point since AFAIK, bento.info is strictly more powerful as a format than setup.cfg.


So that means that *today*, Bento can consume Distutils2 project and compiles them, just by reading their setup.cfg, right ?

And the code you have to convert setup.cfg into bento.info is what I was talking about.

It means that I can create a project without a setup.py file, and just setup.cfg, and have it working with distutils2 *or* bento

That's *exactly* what I was talking about. the setup.cfg is the *common* standard, and is planned to be published at PyPI statically.

Let people out there use their tool of their choice to install a project defined by a setup.cfg

so 2 questions:

1/ does Bento install things following PEP 376 ?

2/ how does the setup.cfg hooks work wrt Bento ?

and last one proposal: how a PEP that defines a setup.cfg standard that is Bento-friendly, but still distutils2-friendly would sound ?