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

Tarek Ziadé ziade.tarek at gmail.com
Wed Sep 23 14:20:31 CEST 2009

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org> wrote:
> At the very least, that would have kept this discussion on Distutils-
> SIG, and Chris couldn't be accused of trying to make an end run around
> that process.  I suggest that posting progress reports to Python-Dev
> is a good idea (attracting attention and maybe participation to the
> process), but making one an opportunity to test the degree of internal
> consensus (or lack of it) on Distutils-SIG by posting there first is
> an even better one.

Please define what "internal consensus on Distutils-SIG" means.

If it means that everyone present in the Mailing-List
needs to agree on a distutils proposal, this will never happen for many reasons.

Here's one :

That's not the distutils mailing list anymore. Here's a list of the projects
"officialy" hosted in this mailing list:

- distutils
- setuptools
- zc.buildout

So, while it's legitimate to get some feedback from setuptools and
zc.buildout users
and developers, (on anyone else) on what we are planning for
distutils, don't you agree that
it's impossible in this context to get a 100% consensus ? and that I need to
take some decisions to move distutils on ?

Especially for this topic. If you take the time to read everything you'll see
that there were no real alternative design proposed, and that I am
just working out
the details because I maintain and code distutils.

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

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list