On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:02:42 -0400 Éric Araujo <e...@netwok.org> wrote: > Hi, > > Lib/packaging is in the repository history, and in my backup clones, but > it’s not visible in any branch head as we have no branch for 3.4 yet. I > can bring the directory back with a simple Mercurial command. > > However, it’s not clear to me that we want to do that. At the inception > of the project, we wanted a new distutils with support for the latest > PEPs and improved extensibility. Then we found a number of problems in > the PEPs; the last time I pointed the problems out I got no reply but > “find a PEP dictator and propose changes”. And when I started the > thread about removing packaging in 3.3, hundreds of replies discussed > changing the whole distutils architecture, splitting the project, > exploring new systems, etc., which is why I’m not sure that we can just > bring back packaging in 3.4 as it was and continue with our previous > roadmap.
People who want a whole new distutils architecture can start distutils3 (or repackaging) if they want. If I have to give my advice, I would favour re-integrating packaging in the stdlib or, better, integrating all changes, one by one, into distutils itself. Regards Antoine. -- Software development and contracting: http://pro.pitrou.net _______________________________________________ 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
