The sdist should include all the source files, including tests and
documentation. In binary distributions, however, they are just dead
weight. Do you want the full documentation and test suites to be
installed for every single dependency when you deploy your application?
I sure don't.
27.04.2016, 21:40, Ethan Furman kirjoitti:
On 04/27/2016 11:13 AM, Alex Grönholm wrote:
Are you seriously saying that you want your bdists to include tests,
documentation etc.?
However you and I agree or disagree on what should be in a bdist, the
command I ran should have produced a bdist based on the sdists I just
created in the same command.
Most developers would not agree with you, including yours truly.
Well, we disagree. To me, the salient difference between an sdist and
a bdist is whether binary artifacts are, um, already built. I
certianly enjoy having docs (so I know how to use the binaries I just
installed) and tests (so I can assure myself the binaries work as
advertised).
If a project is big enough I can see making separate packages for docs
and/or tests, but mine are small.
And whichever way we decide to do the packaging, the tools should work
for us, not us for the tools.
--
~Ethan~
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
