[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Switching python-setuptools to distribute



WHO IS CORSEPIU?

2009/10/13, GEORGIOS GIANNAKIS <georgios giannakis stavros gmail com>:
> 2009/10/13, Mat Booth <fedora matbooth co uk>:
>> 2009/10/12 Toshio Kuratomi <a badger gmail com>:
>>> 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 redhat com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>>
>


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]