Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> writes: > 2009/4/20 Lennart Regebro <rege...@gmail.com>: > > I don't have a good solution to this, unless we can drop setuptools > > dependency on setuptools completely, and just use plain distutils > > for installing and testing setuptools. > > Personally, this type of circular dependency seems totally wrong. I'd > argue that making setuptools not depend on itself is the right thing > to do, unless someone can provide a compelling reason why it is > necessary (and such a reason would hopefully then provide more > concrete avenues for looking for other possible alternative > approaches).
Yes, that seems crazy-making to me and I wasn't aware it was the current situation. +1 for building setuptools on a base of distutils only, especially if it's already been achieved. -- \ “A man's only as old as the woman he feels.” —Groucho Marx | `\ | _o__) | Ben Finney _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
