[Python-Dev] magic in setuptools (Was: setuptools in the stdlib)

[Ronald Oussoren]

On 20-apr-2006, at 23:46, Martin v. Löwis wrote:

> Bob Ippolito wrote:
>>> 'There are several binary formats that embody eggs, but the most  
>>> common
>>> is '.egg' zipfile format, because it's a convenient one for  
>>> distributing
>>> projects.'
>>>
>>> '.egg files are a "zero installation" format for a Python package;'
>>
>> single modules are also such a "zero installation" format too.  So  
>> what?
>>
>> You're simply reading things between the lines that aren't there.   
>> How
>> about you describe exactly what parts of the documentation that  
>> lead you
>> to believe that eggs are designed to compete with solutions like
>> rpm/msi/deb so that it can be clarified?
>
> It's not just the documentation: I firmly believe that many people
> consider .egg files to be a distribution and package management
> format. People have commented that some systems (e.g. OSX) doesn't
> have a usable native packager, so setuptools fills a need here.
> This shows that people do believe that .egg files are to OSX what
> .deb files are to Debian. As .egg files work on Debian, too,
> it is natural that they compete with .deb.
>
> Phillip Eby once said (IIRC) that he doesn't want package authors to
> learn all the different bdist_* commands (which also require access
> to the target systems sometimes), and that they their life gets easier
> as they now only have to ship the "native" Python binary packages,
> namely .egg files.
>
> In this view, rpm/msi/deb have no place anymore, and are obsolete.

In the view of at least some Linux packagers nobody but they should  
create system packages anyway. Personally I think that view is  
misguided, but the view is there.

>
> I can readily believe that package authors indeed see this as
> a simplification, but I also see an increased burden on system
> admins in return.
>
> So if this attitude (Python Eggs are the preferred binary distribution
> format) is wrong, it is the attitude that has to change first. Changes
> to the documentation follow from that. If the attitude is right, I'll
> have to accept that I have a minority opinion.

IMHO python eggs are the preferred distribution format for several  
use cases, but not all. They are very usefull for systems that lack a  
proper package
manager of their own and for managing a developers sandbox.

As a sysadminI'd be a lot less inclined to use eggs to install  
software on a system with a proper package manager (like most linux  
distributions) because the eggs will then not be visible in the  
global view of installed software or play nice with vendor software  
management tools.

Ronald