[Distutils] Colour this bikeshed: Name for setuptools fork

[P.J. Eby]

At 12:50 AM 7/18/2009 -0400, Chris McDonough wrote:
>On 7/17/09 11:47 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
>>Chris McDonough<chrism at plope.com>  writes:
>>
>>>You gotta realize that fielding all these bikeshed emails takes a lot
>>>of time; if it gets named "distribute" or one of the two options from
>>>the poll, so be it.  Give the poor man a mail-responding rest. ;-)
>>
>>Agreed.
>>
>>>There's all of eternity to bikeshed the name after the first release,
>>>but a release is required for there to be anything to bikeshed about.
>>
>>I couldn't disagree more. Discussing the name *after* release will be
>>even less useful because it's so much more difficult to actually change
>>it at that point.
>
>Note that the primary package name that the "distribute" 
>distribution embeds is still named "setuptools" at this point, for 
>better or worse.  I don't know how long this will be true, but it's 
>still true right now, and I suspect it won't change before the first 
>release.  That may be another can of worms, but at this point it's 
>probably not worth losing any sleep over.
>
>In any case, changing the distribution name ("distribute" currently) 
>is pretty trivial in comparison to changing a package name because 
>imports don't need to change.  I'd begin to get more nervous when 
>the package names change. ;-)

Also, this entire discussion may be moot if, as I'm currently 
understanding it, this is simply a matter of other people doing 
maintenance and bug fixes to the 0.6 branch...  in which case there 
is a very strong possibility that I'll just bless various versions of 
it as official 0.6 versions of setuptools.

(One obstacle to this actually happening, though, is the part where 
they're stripping out my release tools, like wikiup.cfg, 
version+version.dat, etc., as I would need to add these back in order 
to actually do a release.)