Meta discussions are generally a complete waste of time. This is the only thing I intend to say on the issue.
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:44, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > As a bystander, what *I* care most about is that Python ends up with a > single approach to creating and distributing extensions. What concerns > me most about this whole discussion, is that it seems like no-one is > attempting to compromise, and participants are pulling further apart > rather than converging on a solution. It's bad if it seems like that to you, because I would say that this is completely incorrect. There is no pulling apart, because there are no standpoints that can pull apart and there are no diverging proposals. There has been two related proposals afaik. Tareks talk about plugins, and mine where I said I would like the default behavior to be: 1. The file list is gotten from a specification in setup.py. 2. If no such specification, the file list is gotten from the VCS. 3. If no VCS, include all files except well known temporary file extensions. This is completely compatible with Tareks proposal for plugins, as this simply could be the three default plugins, if no other plugins are specified. And there has not come up any real arguments against either mine or Tareks proposals. So how could this be "pulling apart"? > PS No, I won't state my requirements again. That'll only restart the > flames. Maybe later, if someone starts a genuine, unbiased, attempt to > collect requirements... Tarek has collected requirements and are still doing so, and everybody is completely open for new requirements, or explanations of why proposed solutions doesn't work. Regards -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista. http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64 _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
