On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Holth <dho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > > I'm going to be pushing an update to one of my projects to PyPI this week > > and so I figured I could use this opportunity to help with patches to the > > User Guide's packaging tutorial. > > > > But to do that I wanted to ask what the current best practices are. > > > > * Are we even close to suggesting wheels for source distributions? > > No, wheels don't replace source distributions at all. They just let > you install something without having to have whatever built the wheel > from its sdist. It is currently nice to have them available. > Then I'm thoroughly confused since the Wheel PEP says in its rationale that "Python needs a package format that is easier to install than sdist". That would suggest a wheel would work for a source distribution and replace sdist zip/tar files. If wheels aren't going to replace what sdist spits out as the installation file format of choice for pip what is it for, just binary files alone? -Brett > > I'd like to see an ambitious person begin uploading wheels that have > no traditional sdist. > > > * Are we promoting (weakly, strongly?) the signing of distributions yet? > > No change. > > > * Are we saying "use setuptools" for everyone, or still only if you need > it > > (asking since there is a stub about installing setuptools but the simple > > example doesn't have a direct need for it ATM, but could use > find_packages() > > and such)? > > Setuptools is the preferred distutils-derived system. distutils should > no longer be considered morally superior. > > The MEBS idea, or a simple setup.py emulator and a contract with the > installer on which commands it will actually call, will eventually let > you do a proper job of choosing build systems. >
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
