[Distutils] Buildout status

[Jim Fulton]

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Tarek Ziadé <ziade.tarek at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Jim Fulton <jim at zope.com> wrote:
> ...
> Not sure to folllow.  You want to port Setuptools into py3k... again ?
>  If so, this was done already in Distribute, and you can join the
> project.

I don't really want to join a project. I already have a number of
projects.

> Or you want to copy our work from Distribute back into Setuptools  ?
> I would not mind of course, merging back the 2 projects would be
> awesome -- but I have no hopes on this.

It's possible that I could reuse that work.  I'd rather port to 2&3
rather than 3.  That is, I'd rather not rely on 2to3 at deployment
time. I find installing distribute in Python 3 to be really annoying
due to the spew from 2to3. I also find the 2to3 development model
really unattractive.

> Although, my suggestion would be to start digging into the
> Distutils2/packaging project instead, since that will be in the
> standard library, and backported in 2.x.

When it's mature, I'll use it.

> I believe it provides all the features buildout needs. And if not we
> should add them

Buildout needs entry points.  Regardless, I fully expect to use
Packaging when it's ready, but I'm stuck with setuptools/distribute
now. I so wish that fork hadn't been done.

> I think it boils down to: we should *all* work together in the
> Distutils2/packaging project for all the basic packaging features we
> need in third-party tools.

I have lots of interesting projects I am working on and want to work
on. I have no interest in making packaging a career.  I'll use
Packaging when it's ready. In the mean time, lots of people need
buildout to work with Python 3 today.

Jim

--
Jim Fulton
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimfulton