2009/7/6 Tarek Ziadé <ziade.ta...@gmail.com>: > why can't we just go ahead and continue the work as we started with PEP 376, > introducing your work on PEP 302-like behavior. > > Then if we get a consensus on this PEP and introduce it in 2.7/3.2, > setuptools will have to follow this consensus.
Essentially, because when I ask questions, responses along the lines of "you have to do it like X because setuptools does that" come back, and (not being a setuptools user) I can't tell whether there's a valid reason in there. I'm uncomfortable assuming that setuptools experience is irrelevant, but I can't distinguish between valid arguments and "setuptools can't change" arguments. I need to write another email with a list of outstanding open issues. If we can thrash them out *without* getting bogged down in setuptools compatibility questions, then I think we can move forward again. I'll do that this evening. Paul. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
