[Distutils] Extending distutils with 3rd party build commands?

[Mark W. Alexander]

On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 01:03:54AM +0200, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> >Well .pkg is used for Mac OS X binary packages too.  Also, the only hit 
> >on google for bdist_pkg is a comment I made a couple months ago.  
> 
> We once had a bdist_pkgtool in CVS but had to remove it again
> due to copyright issues. Dito for bdist_sdux:
> 
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/python/python/dist/src/Lib/distutils/command/Attic/
> 
> Looks like bdist_pkg is OK after all :-) It's a long time
> ago I had reviewed those packages.

Yes, pkgtool is the "proper" Solaris, well, package tool. And I'm +1 for
_any_ additional bdist_* commands being included in mainline.

Also, the issue was not copyright per se, but my employer's name on the
PSF Contributor Agreement. I'm _still_ working that issue (2 years!
that's depressing), however I was recently granted permission to assume
maintainership of an existing Python-style licensed project (pyssh) so
there is light at the end of the tunnel.

(I hope it's not a train ;)

But I'll offer once again advisory assistance to anyone who wants to
"clean room" a bdist_pkgtool and bdist_sdux that can sign the
Contributor Agreement. I strongly believe that the more native package
managers Distutils supports, the easier it is to get Python into
"enterprises." 

Based on having some approval to publish code absent my employer's name,
I've considered packaging the original submissions as "Distutils
Extensions" outside of mainline, since they are standalone files with no
impact on or changes in any other distutils modules. What are thoughts
on that approach?

mwa
-- 
Mark W. Alexander
slash at dotnetslash.net

The contents of this message authored by Mark W. Alexander are released under
the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial license.  Copyright of quoted
materials, if any, are retained by the original author(s).

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/