+1
-Jake
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Kevin Sweeney kswee...@twitter.com.invalid
wrote:
Somewhat complementary work - this change would make the generated packages
equivalent to the ultimate goal of replacing these top-level BUILD files
directly with setup.py files. Users could begin
+1
-=Bill
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Kevin Sweeney kswee...@twitter.com.invalid
wrote:
Somewhat complementary work - this change would make the generated packages
equivalent to the ultimate goal of replacing these top-level BUILD files
directly with setup.py files. Users could begin
We've talked in the past about switching build tools. Just to keep that in
context - how would you weigh this effort against a tool change?
-=Bill
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Kevin Sweeney kevi...@apache.org wrote:
I propose a simplification of the Python BUILD layout as follows and a
Posted https://reviews.apache.org/r/36972/ for feedback.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Bill Farner wfar...@apache.org wrote:
+1
-=Bill
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Kevin Sweeney
kswee...@twitter.com.invalid
wrote:
Somewhat complementary work - this change would make the
Somewhat complementary work - this change would make the generated packages
equivalent to the ultimate goal of replacing these top-level BUILD files
directly with setup.py files. Users could begin testing deployment with the
pants-generated sdists and seamlessly drop in setup.py-generated
