[Python-Dev] PEP 376 proposed changes for basic plugins support

[M.-A. Lemburg]

exarkun at twistedmatrix.com wrote:
> On 12:21 pm, mal at egenix.com wrote:
>> Tarek Ziad� wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 3:06 AM, P.J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
>>> ..
>>>>
>>>> So without specific examples of why this is a problem, it's hard to
>>>> see why
>>>> a special Python-specific set of configuration files is needed to
>>>> resolve
>>>> it, vs. say, encouraging application authors to use the available
>>>> alternatives for doing plugin directories, config files, etc.
>>>
>>> I don't have a specific example in mind, and I must admit that if an
>>> application does the right thing
>>> (provide the right configuration file), this activate feature is not
>>> useful at all. So it seems to be a bad idea.
>>>
>>> I propose that we drop the PLUGINS file idea and we add a new metadata
>>> field called Provides-Plugin
>>> in PEP 345, which will contain the info I've described minus the state
>>> field. This will allow us to expose
>>> plugins at PyPI.
>>>
>>> IOW, have entry points like setuptools provides, but in a metadata
>>> field instead of a entry_points.txt file.
>>
>> Do we really need to make Python packaging even more complicated by
>> adding support for application-specific plugin mechanisms ?
>>
>> Packages can already work as application plugins by simply defining
>> a plugins namespace package and then placing the plugin packages
>> into that namespace.
>>
>> See Zope for an example of how well this simply mechanism works out in
>> practice: it simply scans the "Products" namespace for sub-packages and
>> then loads each sub-package it finds to have it register itself with
>> Zope.
> 
> This is also roughly how Twisted's plugin system works.  One drawback,
> though, is that it means potentially executing a large amount of Python
> in order to load plugins.  This can build up to a significant
> performance issue as more and more plugins are installed.

I'd say that it's up to the application to deal with this problem.

An application which requires lots and lots of plugins could
define a registration protocol that does not require loading
all plugins at scanning time.

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com

Professional Python Services directly from the Source  (#1, Aug 02 2010)
>>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ...        http://www.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ...             http://zope.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ...        http://python.egenix.com/
________________________________________________________________________

::: Try our new mxODBC.Connect Python Database Interface for free ! ::::


   eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH  Pastor-Loeh-Str.48
    D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg
           Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611
               http://www.egenix.com/company/contact/