[Distutils] Timeframe of 2.0 again?

M.-A. Lemburg mal at lemburg.com
Mon Oct 27 09:03:37 EST 2003

Moore, Paul wrote:
> From: Anthony Baxter [mailto:anthony at interlink.com.au]
>>>>"M.-A. Lemburg" wrote
>>FWIW, eGenix still ships 1.5.2 compatible packages and we use
>>the CVS version of distutils to built the binary packages.
> I'm probably being dense here, but why don't you use the version
> of distutils that came with Python (or for Python versions before
> distutils was in the standard library, a fixed distutils version
> compatible with that Python version) to build the binary packages?
> It may be more complex to keep the build environment set up, but
> surely that's a one-off cost to the distributor, rather than a
> significant reason for constraining the development of distutils?

Not so: in that case we'd have to keep in sync with at
least 5 different versions of distutils deployed out there.

Marc-Andre Lemburg

Professional Python Software directly from the Source  (#1, Oct 27 2003)
 >>> Python/Zope Products & Consulting ...         http://www.egenix.com/
 >>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ...        http://python.egenix.com/

::: Try mxODBC.Zope.DA for Windows,Linux,Solaris,FreeBSD for free ! ::::

More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list