[Distutils] Improving setuptools bootstrapping

[Jim Fulton]

On Sep 1, 2006, at 7:35 PM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
...
> Right now, ez_setup.py is used for two purposes.  First, you can  
> include it in a source package in order to be able to use  
> setuptools.  Second, it's also used as a way of installing  
> setuptools in a standalone setting.
...
> So, perhaps we should move to doing something like this: when you  
> run a setup.py that's using ez_setup(), and it appears necessary to  
> download/install setuptools, a message is displayed, something like:

....

> This would reduce ez_setup.py to hardly any code at all.
>
> Pros:
>   * Net-less installs are less painful
>   * Users don't get surprised by "setup.py install" trying to  
> access the net
>   * No version skew or missing version issues
>   * Users can install system packages (RPM, .exe, etc.) of setuptools
>
> Cons:
>   * Manual step for new setuptools adopters (but who's left?)
>   * Might break setuptools-wrapping programs (like zc.buildout and  
> Enstaller) if they rely on ez_setup
>   * Developers might not want to switch to this new approach, if  
> they feel the manual step is unwieldy
>
>
> Does anybody have any thoughts on this, one way or the other?

+1

However, this only addresses the first use case above.  I still like  
ez_setup for the second use case.  In particular, the zc.buildout  
bootstrap script lets ez_setup do most of it's work.  It downloads a  
fresh copy of ez_setup and uses it to download setuptools and  
zc.buildout.  Part of what makes this work is the fact that ez_setup  
has a well-known URL, so my bootstrap script,
http://svn.zope.org/zc.buildout/trunk/bootstrap/bootstrap.py? 
view=auto can be pretty stupid and minimal.

Of course, if ez_setup went away, I'd cope. :)

Jim

--
Jim Fulton			mailto:jim at zope.com		Python Powered!
CTO 				(540) 361-1714			http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation	http://www.zope.com		http://www.zope.org