2009/4/6 Lennart Regebro <rege...@gmail.com>: > 2009/4/6 P.J. Eby <p...@telecommunity.com>: >> I mean understanding the use cases and how distutils features are used in >> the field. > > This is of course true. But quite likely, the only one who does that > is you. So it's up to you to document it so others can make solutions > that are easy to understand. :) > >> I agree with you. But I 100% disagree with Tarek that the way to get there >> is by refactoring the distutils. The distutils are stable (i.e., dead and >> obsolete) and need to be *replaced*, not refactored. > > One of the language summit conclusions was that many of the features > if pkg_resources should make it into the stdlib,
Some people are currently looking at that : extracting the good bits of pkg_resources. > and that since > distutils was stable, it was probably best to make that a new library. That was not exactly the conclusion of the summit. The idea is to make distutils a light, reference library, on wich third party libraries could implements OS-dependant features and so on. So part of the plan is to remove bdist_*, etc.. _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
