[Distutils] setuptools 0.6b4 released
bob at redivi.com
Fri Jul 21 22:48:43 CEST 2006
On Jul 21, 2006, at 12:40 PM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> At 11:20 AM 7/21/2006 -0700, Andrew Straw wrote:
>> Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>>> At 02:49 PM 7/17/2006 -0700, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>>>> That's not a bad idea (update setup.cfg on sdist w/ --no-svn-
>>>> Any chance of getting this in setuptools 0.6 or should I
>>>> start adding MANIFEST.in files to the relevant projects?
>>> Okay, it's in the trunk now as of 0.7a1dev-r50702 and 0.6c1dev-
>>> r50703. It
>>> even handles date and SVN revision tags correctly, by converting
>>> them to a
>>> single --tag-build string and disabling the other tagging
>>> options. So if
>>> you just build from an sdist without doing anything special, you
>>> get the
>>> exact same version the sdist was built with, regardless of how
>>> the version
>>> was originally specified.
>> I'm glad this is being worked on. But a related issue is still
>> biting me
>> with setuptools 0.6c1 in my stdeb package (which builds debian source
>> packages from unmodified setup.py scripts) :
>> Any distutils commands using "self.distribution.get_version()"
>> still get
>> tagged (at least with the svn revision), even if they're being built
>> from the sdist-generated .tar.gz package.
> I'm having trouble following your question. If you generate an
> sdist with
> an SVN revision in the distribution name, then anything you run on the
> unpacked sdist should result in the same version number that
> generated the
> So if I build a source distribution for
> "setuptools-0.6c1dev-r50703.tar.gz", then anything you do with that
> distribution should end up with 0.6c1dev-r50703 as the version
> number. If
> you have something that *doesn't* end up with that version number,
> it's a
> bug. If it *does* have that version number, then it's doing the right
> thing. The point of this change was to make it so that anything
> you build
> from an sdist has the same version number as the sdist was built with.
>> Not knowing the innards of setuptools very well, one idea would be to
>> add something to the .egg-info built by sdist that tells future
>> runs of
>> setuptools not to add tags. This keeps setup.cfg from getting
>> but still has the right effect. There's probably a flaw I haven't
>> thought of, though...
> I'm still not understanding what you're getting at; this should be
> correctly now in 0.6c1, so if it's not, please give me some steps to
> reproduce so I can find out what's wrong. Thanks.
It sounds like Andrew just forgot to use --no-svn-revision...
More information about the Distutils-SIG