[Distutils] PEP 426: proposed metadata caching convention

[Daniel Holth]

Post install hooks are different than setup.py because they are installed
first and then run for all packages, and are not requested by the installed
dist. They are more like rewriting script #!python shebang.

May I humbly suggest deleting things from this pep until it is acceptable
and not the other way around?
On Feb 25, 2013 11:54 AM, "Paul Moore" <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 25 February 2013 15:10, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > entry-points.txt is pure backwards compatibility, though. The only
> > reason I didn't suggest reusing the setuptools name for the file is
> > because I want the __cache__ in the name to clearly identify the files
> > the installer derives from METADATA rather than the ones defined in
> > PEP 376 or installed as part of the distribution.
>
> One thing I *would* like to suggest is that the cached versions of the
> data should be optional. My specific reason for this is that as things
> stand, many wheels are usable without installation, simply by putting
> them on sys.path. As wheels are a distribution format, they won't have
> the cached data, and I'd be unhappy if that fact broke the ability to
> use them as zips.
>
> Paul.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20130225/38af8611/attachment.html>