On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Thomas Kluyver <tho...@kluyver.me.uk> wrote:
> Thank-you all for the discussion and the attempts to accommodate flit, > but I'll bow out now. It's become clear that the way flit approaches > packaging is fundamentally incompatible with the priorities other people > have for the ecosystem. Namely, I see sdists as archival artifacts to be > made approximately once per release, but the general trend is to make > them a key part of the build pipeline. > For the record: your view makes perfect sense to me, and is conceptually cleaner than the one that PEP 517 in its current form prefers. Making a guerilla tool with no concern for integration was fun. It > became frustrating as people began to use it and expected it to play > well with other tools, so I jumped on PEP 517 as a way to bring it into > the fold. That didn't work out, and a tool that doesn't play well with > pip can only be an attractive nuisance at best, even if it technically > complies with the relevant specs. > > Flit is therefore deprecated, and I recommend anyone using it migrate > back to setup.py packaging. > I hope you'll reconsider that deprecation - flit is one of only two (AFAIK) active attempts at making a saner build tool (enscons being the other one), and does have real value I think. Either way, thanks for all the effort you put in! Ralf
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
