[Distutils] PEP 439 and pip bootstrap updated

[Paul Moore]

On 11 July 2013 18:05, PJ Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> > And if people want to promote the -m option then the executable scripts
> just
> > become a secondary convenience. Plus you can't exactly require
> setuptools to
> > create those scripts at install-time with Python if that's when they are
> > going to be installed.
>
> You don't need setuptools in order to include .exe wrappers, though:
> there's nothing setuptools-specific about the .exe files, they just
> run a matching, adjacent 'foo-script.py', which can contain whatever
> you want.  Just take the appropriate wrapper .exe, and rename it to
> whatever 'foo' you want.
>
> IOW, if you want to ship a pip.exe on windows that just does "from pip
> import __main__; __main__()" (or whatever), you can do precisely that,
> no setuptools needed.


With the launcher, a .py file with the relevant #! line set pretty much
covers things. It's not an exe, although there are very few things I know
of that need specifically an exe file, and if you want to omit the ".py"
suffix when invoking it you need to add .py to PATHEXT. But actual exe
launchers are much less critical nowadays, I believe.

What *is* important, though, is some level of consistency. Before
setuptools promoted the idea of declaraive entry points, distributions
shipped with a ridiculous variety of attempts to make cross-platform
launchers (many of which didn't work very well). I care a lot more about
promoting a consistent cross-platform approach than about arguing for any
particular solution...

Paul

Paul.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20130711/5d15c1ed/attachment-0001.html>