On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 01:52:08PM +0100, Matej Cepl wrote: > b) distutils v. setuptools conflict is just an unfortunate testimony > of immature bad state of the Python upstream packaging, but it seems > to me that generally Python world is moving towards setuptools. > Shouldn't we follow the suite and move towards setuptools as well? > Upstream (python core) is doing everything within its power to move away from setuptools, actually. The problem with setuptools is that the upstream author is a pain to work with and the upstream code is poorly written. The problem with moving away from setuptools is that setuptools puts several different types of things together (metadata, plugins, package building and installing, selection and loading between different versions of a library, installation of pre-packaged modules)... and there's only clear replacements for some of those. Python-3.3 offers the packaging module in the stdlib to replace the metadata and package building/installing portion. There's a backport of that for python2 and earlier python3 which is the distutils2 module. I looked at it but the last release doesn't work with multilib. I haven't had time to look at a snapshot yet (people installing on MacOSX report that the latest release doesn't work for them but the latest snapshot does... so a snapshot may be the way to go anyhow.) -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpRokWgcsXzi.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
