On Sep 1, 2006, at 7:35 PM, Phillip J. Eby wrote: ... > Right now, ez_setup.py is used for two purposes. First, you can > include it in a source package in order to be able to use > setuptools. Second, it's also used as a way of installing > setuptools in a standalone setting. ... > So, perhaps we should move to doing something like this: when you > run a setup.py that's using ez_setup(), and it appears necessary to > download/install setuptools, a message is displayed, something like:
.... > This would reduce ez_setup.py to hardly any code at all. > > Pros: > * Net-less installs are less painful > * Users don't get surprised by "setup.py install" trying to > access the net > * No version skew or missing version issues > * Users can install system packages (RPM, .exe, etc.) of setuptools > > Cons: > * Manual step for new setuptools adopters (but who's left?) > * Might break setuptools-wrapping programs (like zc.buildout and > Enstaller) if they rely on ez_setup > * Developers might not want to switch to this new approach, if > they feel the manual step is unwieldy > > > Does anybody have any thoughts on this, one way or the other? +1 However, this only addresses the first use case above. I still like ez_setup for the second use case. In particular, the zc.buildout bootstrap script lets ez_setup do most of it's work. It downloads a fresh copy of ez_setup and uses it to download setuptools and zc.buildout. Part of what makes this work is the fact that ez_setup has a well-known URL, so my bootstrap script, http://svn.zope.org/zc.buildout/trunk/bootstrap/bootstrap.py? view=auto can be pretty stupid and minimal. Of course, if ez_setup went away, I'd cope. :) Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714 http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
