On 20 May 2017 at 19:36, Steve Dower <steve.do...@python.org> wrote: > >> - As a lazy developer, I don't want to read stdout/stderr from a >> subprocess only to spit it back to my own stdout/stderr. I'd much rather >> just launch the subprocess and let it use the same stdout/stderr as my >> build tool. > > > One of the open issues against distutils is that it does this. We can allow > it, but a well-defined tool should capture the output and pass it to the UI > component rather than bypassing the UI component.
I'm a little concerned if we're going to end up with a proposal that means that distutils is in violation of the spec unless this issue is fixed. I'm not sure if that's where we're headed, but I wanted to be clear here - is PEP 517 intended to encompass distutils/setuptools, or are we treating them as a legacy case, that pip should special-case? Paul _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig