[Distutils] [Python Language Summit] Distutils / Packaging survey

David Cournapeau david at ar.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp
Thu Jan 29 02:47:22 CET 2009

Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> On Jan 28, 2009, at 5:45 AM, David Cournapeau wrote:
>> This is not the right solution for distributions maintainers: it is a
>> good tool for individual (it gives you uninstallation, etec...) but .deb
>> packages produced by stddeb are not debian-compatible, and cannot be
>> included in debian proper. This is not a critic of stddeb, I think it is
>> a very good tool and useful tool.
>> The *only* right solution for packaging python modules on Linux
>> distribution is to make it as "easy" for packagers as it is for autoconf
>> packages. Meaning having clear differences between installation, binary,
>> libraries, etc... (what's called resources by setuptools, IIUC), so that
>> maintainers can set it up how they want. This way, python developers do
>> not have to care about debian, and distributions maintainers do not have
>> to care about python (well, not more than now).
>> It is a solved problem: autoconf does it well, and has all the required
>> features,
> I'd like to make a radical suggestion: upstream authors should never
> have to worry about building distribution blobs.

that you think it is radical is quite saying about the state of affairs
in python IMHO :) For me, it is obvious that the upstream author should
not have to worry about debian if he is not producing .deb. The problem
is just that today, we make it much harder for packagers than it needs
to be.



More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list