Bill Janssen <jans...@parc.com> wrote: > Andi Vajda <va...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Sigh. The setuptools story is getting worse. > > > I wonder how the > > 'distribute' project is doing... It's the solution I used for the > > Python 3.1 jcc port I did last summer. In particular, I wonder if they > > integrated my patch, for that issue 43 I filed like four years ago. > > The way forward is "packaging" <http://docs.python.org/dev/packaging/> > (which I believe is also "distutils2"). This is the derivation of > "distribute".
Just watched the PyCon talk on this: "packaging" is the Python 3.3+ name, "distutils2" is the Python 2 name. Same codebase and APIs, as much as possible. > See http://guide.python-distribute.org/_images/state_of_packaging.jpg, > in > http://guide.python-distribute.org/introduction.html#current-state-of-packaging. > > ``So basically, I have forked Distutils and renamed its package into > Distutils2. The project is located in http://hg.python.org/distutils2 > and the goal is to put it back into the standard library as soon as it > reaches a state where it starts to be used by the community. Distutils > will just die slowly, probably pulling Setuptools and Distribute with > it.'' > > ``The Distribute project is still important because it can help us > releasing bug fixes or Python 3 support things today.'' > > ``Distutils2 will be 2.4 to 3.2 compatible and will get back from > Distribute the good bits and implement the PEPs that were accepted > lately PEP 345 and PEP 386.'' > > > Do you know if there is a way to detect this special version of > > setuptools? > > No, sorry. > > Bill > > > If so, I could ensure the patch is applied if still needed. > > > > Andi.. > > > > > > > > > > Bill
