2009/10/12 Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx>: > I've been a comaintainer of the python-setuptools package for a long time > and recently became the owner when icon relinquished it. It is currently a > tumultuous time for distributing python modules with a new and active > maintainer for distutils inside of the python stdlib and a fork of > setuptools being worked on. > > That fork is named distribute and there are two branches of development on > it. The 0.7 branch aims to implement API, metadata, and other features that > will make packaging python modules for upstream building and distribution > easier while being more concerned with the effects this has on > Linux packagers. The 0.6 branch intends to be compatible with the current > seutptools package but to fix bugs and introduce features that are backwards > compatible and oft requested. This branch is being actively maintained by a > core group of five committers including the new distutils maintainer. By > contrast, setuptools is maintained by a single maintainer who often has > little time to work on it. > > When installed, the 0.6 branch takes over the setuptools and pkg_resources > python modules. The reasoning is that distribute-0.6 provides the same API > as setuptools and is meant to replace it. If the module was installed > differently, consuming code (all the setup.py modules in any setuptools > using package as well as code that relies on setuptools features at runtime) > would all need to change their import statements to use the new names > explicitly. This choice is being made upstream by the distribute project. > > Upstream, the python community has viewed the fork favorably but since it's > not part of python proper, the only one with say in the matter is the > setuptools author. He has not been willing to abandon the setuptools module > but at the same time hasn't gained any more free time to work on setuptools. > > Several other Linux distributions (gentoo and arch) have started shipping > distribute-0.6 as the source of their setuptools package. I am thinking of > doing the same for rawhide and pushing the change to older Fedora releases > if bugs are reported that are fixed in distribute but not in seutptools as > having a responsive upstream that cares about distribution packaging issues > is a great plus for us. I raised this plan on fedora-python-devel and > received one positive comment and no negative feedback so I'm just > mentioning it here so a broader audience can ask any questions or raise any > issues before putting this into effect. > > -Toshio > I was unaware of all this. Is there a reason why the setuptools author will not grant commit rights to others? Going solely on your email it seems like a fork would be unnecessary if he was willing to share the workload... -- Mat Booth A: Because it destroys the order of the conversation. Q: Why shouldn't you do it? A: Posting your reply above the original message. Q: What is top-posting? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
