On gio, 2010-12-30 at 00:07 +0100, Hartmut Goebel wrote: > Hi, > > it's 2 1/2 years since I looked into pyinstallers development. Sometime > I was afraid, pyinstaller will not be developed any further. But now I > see, there has been done plenty of work, e.g support for Windows 7, > Python 2.7 and so on. This is great! > > The upcoming pyinstaller.py will bring PyInstaller another step further. > It will lay the basis for integration into distutils/setuptools. > > I may have some time the next months for developing for pyinstaller. My > personal roadmap includes tickets #304, #232 and #32, which I need it > for creating a windows package of pdfposter. > > Since I did not follow the discussions some time now: Any hints where is > a good point to start?
Well, I don't think distutils integration has ever been discussed, so maybe it's time to discuss this. There is two different levels of integration that could be attempted: 1) Making so PyInstaller can be installed into a system using distutils (setup.py install), instead of the current "unpack zip/tgz and use it". 2) Integrating the PyInstaller build step within distutils/setuptools so that PyInstaller can be executed through distutils (just like py2exe). I personally dislike both these features. Feature #1 would not provide a great benefit for the user, IMO. The only real benefit I can see is that people that loves using easy_install/pip can get a copy of PyInstaller through those package managers, but it doesn't fix the problem for people that would prefer a .deb/.rpm package for instance. On the other hand, it would be complicated to reengineer PyInstaller to fit into the site-packages directory, specifically because PyInstaller is *not* a package. For instance, I dislike the way trac or moinmoin install into site-packages; IMO a python *application* is a different beast from a python *package* and should follow different rules for distribution and installation. Feature #2 is something I really dislike. I think PyInstaller's current design of Makespec+Build to be far superior and more flexible then trying to fit everything within the constraints of the distutils syntax for setup.py. If you take a look at the work being done in the makespec_ng branch, we are planning to push this design even further, with a new and more powerful .spec file that can even be updated by import hooks to add library-specific options under user's control (eg: PyQt4 hook can add an option to .spec file to let the user decide which Qt plugins to bundle, etc.). Why do you care so much about distutils/setuptools integration? What features are you missing? Thank your for getting back to PyInstaller :) -- Giovanni Bajo :: Develer S.r.l. [email protected] :: http://www.develer.com Blog: http://giovanni.bajo.it Last post: Compile-time Function Execution in D -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PyInstaller" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pyinstaller?hl=en.
