[Distutils] moving things forward (was: wheel including files it shouldn't)

[Brett Cannon]

Thanks for the update! Glad this is still moving forward. I'll continue to
prod the list if things stall again as I want to respond to "Python
packaging is broken" with "actually your knowledge is just outdated, go
read packaging.python.org". :)

On Tue, 3 May 2016 at 11:28 Nathaniel Smith <njs at pobox.com> wrote:

> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 3 May 2016 at 17:47, Donald Stufft <donald at stufft.io> wrote:
> >> It will likely get decided as part of the build system PEP, whenever
> that
> >> gets picked up again.
> >
> > Yes, but on 15th March
> > (https://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2016-March/028457.html)
> > Robert posted
> >
> >> Just to set expectations: this whole process seems stalled to me; I'm
> >> going to context switch and focus on things that can move forward.
> >> Someone please ping me when its relevant to put effort in again :).
> >
> > And I think that's right. The whole build system PEP issue appears
> > stalled from a lack of someone willing (or with the time) to make a
> > call on the approach we take.
>
> No, no, Nick's not the blocker. I'm the blocker! (Sorry)
>
> Donald + Robert + I had a longish conversation about this on IRC a
> month ago [1]. I volunteered to summarize back to the mailing list,
> and then I flaked -- so I guess this is that belated email :-).
>
> Here's the tentative conclusions we came to:
>
> Blocker 1 is figuring out what to do about the sdist format. The
> debate is between keeping something that's basically the current
> format, versus somehow cleaning it up (e.g. Donald's "source wheel"
> ideas). To move forward:
> - I'll write up a PEP that attempts to just document/standardize the
> current de facto sdist format and send it to the mailing list
> (basically: filename convention, PKG-INFO + a list of which fields in
> PKG-INFO pypi actually cares about, presence of setup.py), and adds
> some sort of optional-defaulting-to-1 SDist-Version (I guess in a file
> called SDIST by analogy with WHEEL). And also contains a rationale
> section explaining the trade-offs of standardizing this versus
> creating a new extension.)
> - Donald will make his case for the new extension approach on the mailing
> list
> - We beg Nick to read over both things and make a ruling so we can move on
>
> Blocker 2 is figuring out whether the new pip <-> build system "hook"
> interface should be command-line based (like the current draft of PEP
> 516) or Python function call based (like the current draft of PEP
> 517). It sounds like currently Donald and I are in favor of the python
> hooks approach, and Robert is indifferent between them and just wants
> to move forward, so we agreed that unless anyone objects we'll drop
> the command-line approach and go ahead with refining the Python
> function call approach. So... if you want to object then speak up now.
>
> Then there are a bunch of details to work out about what hooks to
> provide exactly and what their semantics should be, but hopefully once
> we've settled the two issues above that will be an easier discussion
> to have.
>
> So yeah, basically the next step is for me [2] to write up a spec for
> how sdists currently (really) work.
>
> -n
>
> [1] Logs (split across two pages in the log viewer):
>   http://chat-logs.dcpython.org/day/pypa-dev/2016-03-30#18.23.46.njs
>   http://chat-logs.dcpython.org/day/pypa-dev/2016-03-31#00.29.32.lifeless
> [2] Or if someone else wants to raise their hand and volunteer I
> wouldn't object, obviously I am a bit swamped right now :-)
>
> --
> Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
> _______________________________________________
> Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20160503/c128cd31/attachment-0001.html>