[Distutils] Package install failures in 2.6.3 - setuptools vs Distribute
P.J. Eby
pje at telecommunity.com
Mon Oct 5 20:21:28 CEST 2009
At 06:53 PM 10/5/2009 +0200, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>Possibly if you somehow
>think it's the Distribute teams fault that a bugfix in Python ended up
>breaking setuptools. If it would have been better not to fix that bug,
>then the blame reasonably goes to the Python core developers, not the
>Distribute team.
In this case, though, the "Python core developer" is also the
Distribute lead. (i.e., it was Tarek who made the changes to the
distutils.) So it's a bit understandable that some people might
wonder if there was a conflict of interest.
I don't personally think that's the case; it's pretty much inevitable
that the distutils making progress means other things will
break. But it's easy to see how others might take the situation
another way, or treat it as an example of Distribute policy towards
backward compatibility, or of what kind of breakage is considered
acceptable in a dot release.
It would be good to bear in mind that extending the distutils (or
setuptools) is *not* monkeypatching; both libraries provide explicit
assurance that subclassing is in fact allowed. And there's nothing
all that special about setuptools' subclassing of build_ext; in fact,
if you look back in the archives here, other people have done
equivalent subclassing to support dynamic library building. I
haven't checked their code, but there is a strong possibility that it
would also fail in the same way. This is not really about
monkeypatching, or about special support for setuptools.
More information about the Distutils-SIG
mailing list