Where does setuptools live?
inky788 at gmail.com
Fri Jul 10 18:44:34 CEST 2009
On Jul 10, 10:26 am, Chris Withers <ch... at simplistix.co.uk> wrote:
> Inky 788 wrote:
> > Currently, distutils itself is being actively developed. More info
> > about this here:http://tarekziade.wordpress.com/
> > My (albeit anonymous) advice is: use distutils. Manually download
> > packages as-needed from PyPI and install manually using standard
> > distutils.
> No thanks. I'm a big fan of buildout. Making it possible for packages to
> specify their dependencies is a big win...
Yup, it's a big win. But package installation for Python is a bit of a
mess right now. Neither setuptools nor buildout (nor pip for that
matter) are a standard part of Python. It's rather silly that although
Python is a batteries-included language, and it's mid-2009, and Python
3.1 has been released, that Python *still* doesn't have a standard
built-in way to handle package installation (including dependencies
My guess is that once distutils finishes getting spruced up, some
intrepid hacker is going to:
* take the best parts of pip and the best parts of setuptools (I don't
know anything about buildout),
* stir vigorously,
* ruthlessly remove the excess pieces,
* write good documentation for it,
* throw the result up on github/launchpad/bitbucket/whatever,
and then *that's* what everyone's going to start using and which will
eventually make it into the Python std lib.
But that's just my anon 2 cents.
More information about the Python-list