I'll offer my two cents. But first, I want to suggest the use of
Extensions (http://pypi.python.org/pypi/extensions) opposed to
setuptools style entrypoints. Distutils2, the successor to Distutils and
therefore Setuptools, will not support entry points as part of the
distribution setup. Or at least this was the decision the last time I
On 11/12/10 5:17 PM, Iain Duncan wrote:
> Reading some of the diaolgue on the pylons/bfg merger has me curious
> about the following, wondering if any experts care to share opinions and
> war stories:
I have an actual case where I used used entry points in wsgioauth and I
regret doing so.
> - what is the best use case for extending through entry points?
Part of my decision to use entry points was from my experience at pycon.
People hear reference to zope and either cringe or run away. So if
people see zope.* as a dependency they decide not to use use it. ;)
> - why/when would you use entry points and entires in an ini file vs
> registering modules/plugins as zca entries?
I'm a big fan of ini files, but they have limitations. Though, the
simplicity makes this configuration format one of the best.
Entry points are global. There need not be any direct reference to
entry-point configuration like you would need to do in ZCA. So in the
case of wsgioauth, I have wsgioauth.zodb which provides ZODB integration
> - pros and cons of each approach?
The configuration is built into the distribution, rather than into say a
zcml file or python configuration script. I consider this both a pro and
con, because the defines are available right away and comes straight out
of the distribution itself, but these are not definitions that can be
-Michael Mulich (pumazi)
Repoze-dev mailing list