[Distutils] Builders vs Installers

Paul Moore p.f.moore at gmail.com
Wed Mar 27 16:11:38 CET 2013

On 27 March 2013 14:41, Lennart Regebro <regebro at gmail.com> wrote:
> Can you explain to me why you as an end user can not just install the packages?
> Why do you need to first build wheels?

Mainly just as Daniel said for convenience of repeat installs (in
virtualenvs). But also I think there are a *lot* of different
workflows out there and we need to avoid focusing on any one
exclusively (the strict builder/installer split is more focused on
production installs than on developers installing into virtualenvs,
for instance).

On 27 March 2013 14:44, Vinay Sajip <vinay_sajip at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> I personally have no problem with "pip wheel" staying, but it does muddy pip's
> original intent as denoted by pip standing for "pip installs packages".

I think we have to remember that pip is a reasonably mature tool with
a large existing user base. I don't want the idea that pip is now the
"official Python installer" to be at odds with continued support of
those users and their backward compatibility needs. Refactoring pip's
internals and moving towards support of the new standards and workflow
models is one thing, and I'm 100% in favour of that, but I don't see
major changes in fundamentals like "pip install foo" (working
seamlessly even if there are no wheels available for foo) being on the
cards. Having a "pip wheel" command fits into that model simply as a
way of saying "stop the pip install process just before the actual
final install, so that I can run that final step over and over without
redoing the first part". Think of it as "pip install
--all-but-install" if you like :-)


More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list