[Distutils] PEP 517 again

[Chris Jerdonek]

On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 5:17 PM xoviat <xoviat at gmail.com> wrote:

> Whatever it was, removing it seems to have had no effect on the tests. I
> will remove it unless someone has an objection.
>

Just FYI, I wouldn't take the tests still passing as a major signal. I've
noticed there are even common code paths / functional scenarios that aren't
under test.

--Chris




> 2017-09-02 18:26 GMT-05:00 xoviat <xoviat at gmail.com>:
>
>> Donald,
>>
>>
>> This was your work in https://github.com/pypa/pip/pull/2169.
>> Unfortunately the comments were quite sparse.
>>
>> 2017-09-02 18:25 GMT-05:00 xoviat <xoviat at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> One more issue that has come up is that "--no-user-cfg" seems to be
>>> passed to the egg_info invocation if the "isolated" parameter is enabled. I
>>> don't understand what this does, but it is again not defined in the PEP 517
>>> interface. Should we always pass this parameter or should we never pass it?
>>>
>>> 2017-09-02 14:42 GMT-05:00 Donald Stufft <donald at stufft.io>:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 1, 2017, at 2:30 PM, Chris Barker <Chris.Barker at noaa.gov> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 9:23 PM Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> since it
>>>>> doesn't reliably distinguish between "this cached wheel was downloaded
>>>>> from a repository" and "this wheel was generated locally with a
>>>>> particular version of Python".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It shouldn't have to. sigh.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>  PEP 517 deliberately doesn't let
>>>>> frontends do that as part of the initial build process (instead, if
>>>>> they want to adjust the tags, they need to do it as a post-processing
>>>>> step).
>>>>>
>>>>> Since PEP 517 breaks the current workaround for the caching scheme
>>>>> being inaccurate, the most suitable response is to instead fix pip's
>>>>> caching scheme to use a two tier local cache:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm still confused -- if setuptools ( invoked  by pip) is producing
>>>> incorrectly named wheels -- surely that's a bug-fix/workaround that should
>>>> go into setuptools?
>>>>
>>>> If the build is being run by pip, then doesn't setuptools have all the
>>>> info about the system that pip has?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Someone building a wheel for distribution is likely intimately aware of
>>>> that project, and can take care to ensure that the wheel is built in such a
>>>> way that it is giving people the most optimal behavior. Pip is auto
>>>> building wheels without human intervention, and as such there is nobody
>>>> there to make sure that we’re not accidentally creating a too-broad wheel,
>>>> so we want to ensure that we have some mechanism in place for not re-using
>>>> the wheel across boundaries that might cause issues.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> we also have plenty of PyPI users that
>>>>> explicitly *opt out* of using publisher-provided pre-built binaries.
>>>>> While Linux distributions are the most common example (see [1] for
>>>>> Fedora's policy, for example), we're not the only ones that have that
>>>>> kind of rule in place.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But this is an argument for why pypi should host sdists, and the build
>>>> tools should build sdists, but not why pip should auto-build them.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Condo-forge, for example, almost always builds from source -- sometimes
>>>> an sdist
>>>> from pypi, sometimes a source distribution from github or wherever the
>>>> package is hosted. And sometimes from a git tag ( last resort).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Pip supports more systems than Conda does, and we do that by relying on
>>>> auto building support. Pip supports systems that don’t have a wheel
>>>> compatibility tag defined for them, and for which we’re unlikely to ever
>>>> have any wheels published for (much less wide spread). It’s pretty easy to
>>>> cover Windows/macOS/Some Linux systems, but when you start talking about
>>>> FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, etc then the long tail gets
>>>> extremely long.
>>>>
>>>> Pip works in all these situations, and it does so by relying on
>>>> building from source.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do the Linux distros use pip to build their packages?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not that I am aware of.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I tried to do that with conda-packages, and failed due to pip's caching
>>>>  behavior-- it probably would have worked fine in production, but when I
>>>> was developing the build script, I couldn't reliably get pip to ignore
>>>> cached wheels from previous experimental builds.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Adding —no-cache-dir disables all of pip’s caching.
>>>>
>>>> —
>>>> Donald Stufft
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG at python.org
>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170903/7a5fc33e/attachment.html>