[issue12394] packaging: generate scripts from callable (dotted paths)

[higery]

higery <shoulderhigher at gmail.com> added the comment:

Current patch has removed old-style scripts support and just retain new-style wrapper scripts generation support. 

Now, it uses only dotted path string to support kind of 'console_scripts' of setuptools, and uses dotted path with a 'window' or 'win' option to support kind of 'gui_scripts' of setuptools.

Here is a simple example to show these usecases, in setup.cfg:

scripts = 
    foo = a.b.c.main
    foowin = a.b.c.winmain -window

Then a executable 'foo' file will be generated for Posix platform, console programm 'foo.exe' and window programm 'foowin.exe' files are generated for Windows platform. The 'window' option is just used to show that this entry is a kind of 'gui_scripts' entry to support gui programm wrappers generation.

Now, there is an issue to consider when we make this change:

'scripts' belongs to the 'files' section in setup.cfg, it's still ok now to place it in 'files'? Still take the above example to say, 'foo=a.b.c.main' and 'foowin=a.b.c.winmain -window' are just dotted path strings to show main executable entry function, they are not existed files and are only just used to generate files.

In addition, there are two kinds of configuration files supported in packaing - setup.py and setup.cfg, and both of them can exist in a project at the same time , and have different purposes for usage. setup.cfg just offers users a way to change the default configuration, so I think we should write the dotted strings in setup.py, do anyone agree with me? Then the above writting way of 'scripts' maybe changed...

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue12394>
_______________________________________