[Distutils] PEP 517 again

Thomas Kluyver thomas at kluyver.me.uk
Mon Aug 28 15:59:21 EDT 2017

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017, at 08:50 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> My main motivation for wavering is that I thought agreeing to trust
> the backend would simplify many of the decisions, and it's immensely
> frustrating to me that we're still debating the same question in the
> "return None" thread.

The difference I see with the "return None" question is that there we
have an alternative (return NotImplemented) which is just as simple for
both sides, but avoids the identified issue with a buggy backend. The
only argument there seems to be for using None is about semantics - and
that's not a great argument, because 'practicality beats purity'.

With the questions over sdist/wheel consistency, there's a complexity
cost, for the spec and for frontends, in deciding that they can't. So
we're weighing a trade-off: do we force ourselves to resolve the
notimplemented question so that frontends can do sdist-wheel+fallback,
or do we leave it up to frontends and risk some bugs which we might
otherwise have prevented.


More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list