[Python-Dev] Distutils ML wrap-up: setup.cfg new format

Tarek Ziadé ziade.tarek at gmail.com
Wed Sep 23 13:58:54 CEST 2009

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 12:53 AM, Sridhar Ratnakumar
<sridharr at activestate.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:48:08 -0700, Chris Withers <chris at simplistix.co.uk>
> wrote:
>> Since the language summit at PyCon 2009 various committers, including
>> me, have been encouraging Tarek to act as distutils dictator to get
>> things finished as we all know people are prone to bikeshedding that
>> would kill any forward momentum we have towards improving the
>> packaging situation.
>>  ...except that this isn't bikeshedding. Use of that term just to stifle
>> productive discussion is also rude.
> As I see it, the choice of syntax *as such* is an issue of bikeshedding
> except that the choice of one syntax over the another could make it
> supportive to add an useful feature in setuptools to distutils. For
> instance, this syntax which I proposed -
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2009-September/013289.html -
> will make us think about adding install_requires/extra_requires to distutils
> *in addition to* the conditional metadata .. rather than inventing a new
> syntax to support only conditional metadata.

Please keep in mind that the original proposal is having the ability to
get static metadata (metadata: PEP 314) without running any code.

Your mail contains two things:

- yet another way to express the conditions  (that's the bikeshedding)
- a setuptools mechanism located in setup.py that works with an option
to build a
  requires.txt file when you install a package or create a binary distribution.

The later is not related to what we want to do, or if it is, please
refine your proposal
and make it clear at Distutils-SIG.

Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org | オープンソースはすごい!

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list