[Python-Dev] setuptools in the stdlib ( r45510 - python/trunk/Lib/pkgutil.py python/trunk/Lib/pydoc.py)

[Phillip J. Eby]

At 10:14 PM 4/18/2006 -0700, Neal Norwitz wrote:
>On 4/18/06, Phillip J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
> > At 11:55 PM 4/18/2006 +0200, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> > >who decided that setuptools should be added to 2.5, btw?
> >
> > Guido proposed it on Python-dev when the 2.5 schedule was first being
> > discussed.  I discussed it with him off-list, ...
>
>I thought more was discussed on-list, but apparently not.  I searched
>my mail and could find no direct discussion on python-dev.  I saw
>quite a few references to setuptools being included in 2.5, but
>nothing explicit.  That's unfortunate.

Here are the threads that Guido started; the longer one includes a number 
of discussions about setuptools-related features.  MvL raised an objection 
to the whole idea of a Python-specific packaging format, which I responded 
to, and there was some other discussion about the relative utility of 
setuptools' approach versus learning (and building) a half-dozen bdist_* 
formats for different platforms:

   http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-February/060723.html
   http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-February/060869.html


>I was also working under the assumption that people would complain if
>they didn't like something.  What do people think should happen for
>the "Possible features" section?  Should I ask if there are any
>objections to each item?

Well, Guido asked about including setuptools, and it doesn't seem to have 
done any good in this case.  :)  I'm not sure how much more explicit you 
can get.

Yes, he called it setuplib in the first thread, but Georg knew what he 
meant anyway, and then Guido corrected himself in the second thread -- 
which also had a title that should've caught the eye of anybody interested 
in distutils-related things.  (bdist_* to stdlib.)

I was surprised that MAL didn't comment *then*, actually, and mistakenly 
thought it meant that our last discussion on the distutils-sig (and my 
attempts to deal with the problems) had been successful.  Between that and 
MvL's mild response to the explicit discussion of supporting setuptools, I 
thought their votes had effectively moved from -1 to -0.  Off-list 
discussion with Fredrik suggested that he too had shifted from -1 to -0, 
and since those were the only core developers that I knew of who had ever 
said anything the least bit negative about setuptools, I assumed this meant 
that Guido's motion had carried, so to speak.

I mention this mainly to clarify that this was not some attempt by me to 
slip setuptools in past opposition; I genuinely thought the objectors had 
gone from "don't bring that stuff anywhere near me" to "I don't like it but 
other people seem to, so whatever."