[Distutils] RFC: Binary Distribution Format for distutils2/packaging
tarek at ziade.org
Wed Mar 14 03:56:38 CET 2012
On 3/13/12 7:50 PM, Carl Meyer wrote:
> On 03/13/2012 05:18 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>> 1) setuptools eggs
>> - Have to support legacy meta-data format
>> 2) bdist
>> - Need to add python version for:
>> - compatibility info
>> - also provides delimeter between version # and platform
>> - Need to update setuptools/distribute to handle (or ignore) them.
>> 3) New egg-like format "pbd"
>> - Arrange suffix so ignored by setuptools/distribute
>> - new-style meta data
>> - would be a zip file
>> - Essentially, .egg format with new-style meta data and different
>> Option 3) looks the best to us, so we propose:
>> - Introduce a new binary distribution format with a ".pbd" suffix
>> and an egg-like structure.
>> An example file name:
>> - Deprecate bdist format.
>> D2/p will not support generation or installation of bdist
> In terms of distribution format, this sounds great; I think a clean
> break and new format that existing systems will just naturally ignore is
> the way to go.
> Your message doesn't address the on-disk installed format. I hope that
> the installed format (at least the d2/p default) will be consistent with
> PEP 376 (unzipped and "flat"), not an egg-style importable zip file
> relying on its own dedicated entry in a pth file.
yeah the installation format is PEP 376 for *all* distributions,
including the old ones:
whatever gets installed is converted into PEP 376 if it's not a
We're only talking here about a replacement for a binary *distribution*.
distutils' bdist is broken (the name of the file does not contain the py
setuptools' egg would be a decent choice, it adds more legacy burden.
I am excited we had that discussion with Jim, 3) seems the way forward
> Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG at python.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Distutils-SIG