[Distutils] What's special about numpy, scipy, ...was: Remove distutils, was: red, green, refactor ...

[anatoly techtonik]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:10 PM, Thomas Güttler <
guettliml at thomas-guettler.de> wrote:

> Am 21.10.2015 um 18:46 schrieb Chris Barker:
> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Thomas Güttler <
> guettliml at thomas-guettler.de <mailto:guettliml at thomas-guettler.de>> wrote:
> >
> >     I ask myself: Why a standard? I see that a standard is very
> important if there will be
> >     several implementations (for example TCP/IP, protocols like HTTP,
> SMTP, IMAP, ...)
> >
> >     But here a single implementation for creating and installing
> packages would be enough.
> >
> >     Is a standard really needed?
> >
> >
> > Yes -- because of exactly what you say above -- we really can't have a
> SINGLE build system that will well support everything --
> >  the common use-caes, sure (distutils already does that), but when it
> comes to bulding complex packages like numpy, sciPy, etc, it's really
> inadequate.
>
> What happens if the common use cases are inadequate?
>
> My guess: re-inventing the same stuff over and over again. Once in numpy,
> once in scipy ...
>
> Why should it be impossible to get all the needs of numpy and scipy into
> setuptools?
>
> I have a dream: For packaging and building package provides only **data**.
> Data is condition-less: No single "if", "def" or method call. Just data:
> json or yaml ...
>
> Even for complex packages.
>
> This data gets processed by setuptools. I don't see a need for more than
> one library doing this. Plugins are nice and can solve edge cases.
>

setuptools is one bloated piece of code that contains too much features.
I'd prefer more lean and mean package.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20151022/9b64fbf5/attachment.html>