[Distutils] PEP 426: proposed change to extension fields + entry points

Daniel Holth dholth at gmail.com
Mon Feb 25 23:55:13 CET 2013

All I'm trying to say is do not add anything else to pep 426. There will be
other versions. This version can be consumed by distutils as of last July.
Daniel Holth <dholth <at> gmail.com> writes:

> We all must realize that incremental improvements are not harmful. Delay
harmful; there has been no obvious way to make a Python package this decade
based on the idea that something better might be just around the corner or
the current way will be deprecated.
> The goal of this version of the PEP is to better represent important
setuptools metadata statically while imposing as near to zero cost as
on the actual setuptools users. They will not welcome an unproven
that requires work on their part. Instead, we change things a little bit,
support setuptools / distribute OR "something else" for 5 years, until
"something else" is obviously, compellingly better.

I'm not sure what work we're asking setuptools *users* to do: IIUC, the
setuptools files in .egg-info and the corresponding ones in .dist-info are
edited by hand by users.

As far as I can see, having JSON-format files will not adversely impact the
workload for anyone, compared with the suggestion that Nick made (embedding
in specific parts of a key-value format) and which I was responding to.


Vinay Sajip

Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG at python.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20130225/2e827bc0/attachment.html>

More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list