On 2017-08-28 17:48:40 +0000 (+0000), Daniel Holth wrote: > Imo PBR is entirely a setuptools creature, without special > concerns to operate in pep517 land. If I were them I'd rewrite it > to not require setup.py and call that pbr2. [...]
While it's true that PBR relies on setuptools entrypoints _today_, the expectation is that it will also grow a PEP 517 build-system.build-backend compliant interface once the spec is officially approved. At least one problem with "just rewrite it" is that we expect to support people using old (pre-517) versions of pip for years to come, so will likely end up with some sort of hybrid implementation for as long as backwards compatibility needs to be maintained. It may also end up coupled with some manner of pre-build wrapper to consume/transform existing static metadata and emit a suitable pyproject.toml file, though that's for social reasons as much as anything. -- Jeremy Stanley
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
