yea, all those comebacks make sense to me. we should try the bundle and see if it works.
we already do some fancy footwork when working with setup.py https://github.com/pypa/pip/blob/develop/pip/req.py#L602 https://github.com/pypa/pip/blob/develop/pip/req.py#L687 https://github.com/pypa/pip/blob/develop/pip/req.py#L269 https://github.com/pypa/pip/blob/develop/pip/wheel.py#L291 I guess we'd be doing some additional override work in sys.modules. Marcus On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Donald Stufft <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jul 13, 2013, at 3:35 PM, Marcus Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > > As you're aware I think it makes the most sense to just bundle setuptools >> wholesale. This makes it impossible to "break" pip by something going wrong >> in setuptools causing it to be uninstalled and means that for users who are >> only doing installs, they don't need setuptools installed just pip. >> > > I'm a fan of bundling too (if it works), but the "dynamic install of > setuptools" idea also offers what you mention, although admittedly with > more fragility. If a user uninstalled setuptools, it would be installed > again when needed, and users only need pip to get started, and don't have > to think about the setuptools dependency themselves. > > The drawbacks of bundling setuptools: > 1) maybe some weird bug/side-effect shows up after we do it (ok, maybe > that's FUD) > 2) users can't upgrade themselves (for use in pip) > 3) more tedium in our release process. > 4) feels odd to bundle it knowing we'd likely drop it later, if we do the > MEBs thing. > > Marcus > > > > 1) That's kinda FUD-y yea ;) But I'd say it's equally as likely to have > weird bugs/side effects due to people using different combinations of > pip/setuptools with pip than we've tested. > > 2) This much is true, the question then becomes how important is that? If > there's a major regression in setuptools that needs fixed I'd think we'd > release an updated pip. If there's new functionality I would guess we'd > need to expose that in pip anyways. > > 3) I think this isn't as big of a deal as it sounds. Especially given we > can write tooling to make it simpler :) > > 4) Even if MEBs were here *right now* we'd still have nearly 150k source > dists that required setuptools. So either in the MEB system we'd be > grabbing setuptools *a lot* or we could just bundle it to provide a better > UX for people using the large corpus of existing software. I think it will > be a long time once the MEBs exist before they gain enough traction that > even the bulk of installs are using that system. MEBs depend on sdist 2.0 > which hasn't even been started yet ;) > > > ----------------- > Donald Stufft > PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 > DCFA > >
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
