On 08/21/2013 10:32 AM, Daniel Holth wrote: >> 2) Wheel's decision to follow distutils' documentation rather than >> distutils' behavior when it comes to the location for installing >> data_files with relative paths; see >> https://bitbucket.org/dholth/wheel/issue/80/wheel-does-not-install-data_files-in-site > > Django has fixed it by using package_data appropriately: > https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/19252 . The problem isn't unique > to wheel, the same data_files mishap happens with bdist_wininst. > > "Regardless, comment 5 is correct that we jump through way too many > hoops in our setup.py in order to try to trick distutils into handling > data_files as if they were package_data, and that is the root cause of > this bug. Instead we should just use package_data and solve the > problem properly."
Yup, that's my comment you're quoting :-) I do think from the packager end using package_data is the right solution. But given the existence of distributions using data_files this way (and the likelihood that not all of them will be fixed), is there a good argument for wheel to not maintain compatibility with sdists and python setup.py install? Are there distributions out there relying on the bdist_wininst behavior? Carl
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
