[Distutils] Q about best practices now (or near future)

[Ronald Oussoren]

On 17 Jul, 2013, at 17:55, Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> On 17 July 2013 16:46, Daniel Holth <dholth at gmail.com> wrote:
> > * Are we saying "use setuptools" for everyone, or still only if you need it
> > (asking since there is a stub about installing setuptools but the simple
> > example doesn't have a direct need for it ATM, but could use find_packages()
> > and such)?
> 
> Setuptools is the preferred distutils-derived system. distutils should
> no longer be considered morally superior.
> 
> Personally, I still reserve judgement on setuptools. But that's mainly if you actually use its features (you should carefully consider and understand the implications if you use its script wrapper functionality, for example).
> 
> I see no reason to knee-jerk use it if you don't use any of its functionality, though. I may be in a minority on that, though :-)

I agree, and if metadata 2.0 and bdist_wheel support were added to distutils there'd be even less reason to use setuptools. I primarily use setuptools for its dependency system on installation, and that's nicely covered by using metadata 2.0, wheels and pip.

>  
> The MEBS idea, or a simple setup.py emulator and a contract with the
> installer on which commands it will actually call, will eventually let
> you do a proper job of choosing build systems.
> 
> By the way, what *does* MEBS mean? I've seen a few people use the term, but never found an explanation...

MEta Build System.

Ronald

> 
> Paul
> _______________________________________________
> Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig