[Python-Dev] Packaging and binary distributions for Python 3.3

[PJ Eby]

On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 3:15 AM, Éric Araujo <merwok at netwok.org> wrote:

>  After all, if setuptools and then pkg_resources were turned
> down for inclusion in Python 2.5, it’s not now that we have packaging

 that we’ll change our mind and just bless eggs.


Actually, that's not what happened. I withdrew the approved-by-Guido,
announced-at-PyCon, and already-in-progress implementation, both because of
the lack of package management features, and because of support concerns
raised by Fredrik Lundh.  (At that time, the EggFormats doc didn't exist,
and there were not as many people familiar with the design or code as there
are now.)   For the full statement, see:

   http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-April/064145.html

(The withdrawal is after a lot of background on the history of setuptools
and what it was designed for.)

In any case, it definitely wasn't the case that eggs or setuptools were
rejected for 2.5; they were withdrawn for reasons that didn't have anything
to do with the format itself.  (And, ironically enough, AFAIK the new
packaging module uses code that's actually based on the bits of setuptools
Fredrik was worried about supporting...  but at least there now are more
people providing that support.)

What we can do however
> is to see what bdist_egg does and define a new bdist command inspired by
> it, but without zipping, pkg_resource calls, etc.
>

Why?  If you just want a dumb bdist format, there's already bdist_dumb.
 Conversely, if you want a smarter format, why reinvent wheels?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20111009/bd83da53/attachment.html>