Shouldn't we wean our internal tools off this obsolete version of distutils too, rather than just move it around?
On 5/10/2022 4:33 PM, Christian Heimes wrote:
> On 10/05/2022 13.18, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> test_peg_generator and test_cppext build C extensions with distutils.
>> Until these tests are modified to use something else, we still need to
>> keep distutils. So I propose to rename it to _distutils to remove it
>> from the stdlib. Maybe these tests can use ensurepip to install
>> setuptools which provides distutils.
>>
>> There is also the c-analyzer tool which uses distutils to run a C
>> preprocessor.
>
> We can easily take care of test_cppext and add the build step to
> Makefile. How does test_peg_generator depend on distutils? I don't see
> an import of distutils in the directory.
>
> I would prefer to fix and remove all imports of distutils before we
> resort to renaming the package. Please give us time until alpha 1. There
> is no need to rush it *now*.
I agree. The internal tools that use it are all in our Tools directory,
so we can move distutils there and explicitly add an import path to
locate it. No need to keep it in the stdlib (Lib/) at all.
Migrating to Makefile builds is probably better long-term, but not as
important as moving distutils out from the stdlib so that setuptools can
rely on their copy being the "main" one.
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/LGF4BJMN3H7L6QFTZTDBMOA2GPZQFHC6/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
--