On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 18 July 2013 22:08, Marcus Smith <qwc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> it's a practical problem for users, due to being currently responsible for >> fulfilling the setuptools dependency themselves in non-virtualenv >> environments >> IMO, we need to bundle or install it for them (through dynamic installs, >> or add the logic to get-pip) > > > Seriously, we're talking here about bundling pip with the Python installer. > Why not just bundle setuptools as well? Don't vendor it, don't jump through > hoops, just bundle it too, so that all Python environments can be assumed to > have pip and setuptools present. (Note that I'm one of the least likely > people to advocate setuptools around here, and yet even I don't see why > we're working so hard to avoid just having the thing available...) > > It seems to me that by bundling pip but not setuptools, we're just making > unnecessary work for ourselves.
I'll see if I can do a patch. I don't think it will be hard at all, and I do think it's work that will eventually become necessary. PJE is correct that if we surprise people with non-pkg_resources console_scripts then we will break things for people who are more interested in a working packaging experience. _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
