[Distutils] Time for a setuptools_lite??

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 23 October 2015 at 23:12, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>> The core problem is that the status quo is merely clumsy and
>> inelegant, rather than completely unusable. For all their flaws, both
>> hobbyists and professional developers *can* use the current tools to
>> distribute software (and they're still easier to deal with than
>> writing directly for the native installer toolsets on each target
>> platform), while in any organisation that uses Python heavily, setup
>> scripts for new projects are likely to be either generated from
>> templates or copied from those for old projects, rather than needing
>> to be written from scratch each time.
>
> And now that I've got my "Mr grumpy pants" reaction to the earlier
> parts of the thread out of my system (sorry about that), I'd like to
> revisit Chris's idea of having a *simple* replacement for setuptools
> as a build system.
>
> In particular, what if there was a build system aimed specifically at
> beginners that, at least initially, *only* supported the creation of
> sdist's and wheels for pure Python source publication (no "install" or
> "upload" commands), without support for binary extensions, and
> defaulted to publishing everything in the current directory and below,
> while relying on twine to actually do the uploads to PyPI?

This isn't terribly far from what flit already is.

-n

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith -- http://vorpus.org