Re: [Distutils] Current Python packaging status (from my point of view)

2016-11-05 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 6 November 2016 at 14:44, Robert Collins wrote: > On 3 November 2016 at 22:10, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > ...> dnf/apt/pacman/chocolatey/whatever and make my wheel work everywhere -- > and >> that this will be an viable alternative to conda. > > As a

Re: [Distutils] Current Python packaging status (from my point of view)

2016-11-05 Thread Robert Collins
On 3 November 2016 at 22:10, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Nov 3, 2016 1:40 AM, "Nick Coghlan" wrote: > And then it segfaults because it turns out that your library named is > not abi compatible with my library named . Or it would have been if you > had the

Re: [Distutils] Current Python packaging status (from my point of view)

2016-11-05 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 6 November 2016 at 08:13, Ralf Gommers wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> > Such a grant was already awarded earlier this year by way of the >> > Scientific Python Working Group (which is a collaborative funding >> >

Re: [Distutils] Current Python packaging status (from my point of view)

2016-11-05 Thread Ralf Gommers
On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 7:57 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > On 4 November 2016 at 03:56, Matthew Brett > wrote: > >> But - it would be a huge help if the PSF could help with

Re: [Distutils] Current Python packaging status (from my point of view)

2016-11-05 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 6 November 2016 at 00:45, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2016-11-05 17:43:48 +1000 (+1000), Nick Coghlan wrote: > [...] >> Putting my work hat back on for a moment, I actually wish more people >> *would* start saying that, as Red Hat actively want people to stop >> running their

Re: [Distutils] Current Python packaging status (from my point of view)

2016-11-05 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2016-11-05 17:43:48 +1000 (+1000), Nick Coghlan wrote: [...] > Putting my work hat back on for a moment, I actually wish more people > *would* start saying that, as Red Hat actively want people to stop > running their own applications in the system Python, and start using > Software Collections

Re: [Distutils] Versioned trove classifiers for Django

2016-11-05 Thread James Bennett
Could we get 'Framework :: Django :: 1.10' please? Django 1.10 has been out for a while :) On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Maurits van Rees < m.van.r...@zestsoftware.nl> wrote: > Fair enough. :-) > > See you in six or more months. ;-) > > Maurits > > Op 04/12/15 om 00:53 schreef Richard Jones:

Re: [Distutils] continuous integration options (was Re: Travis-CI is not open source, except in fact it *is* open source)

2016-11-05 Thread Wes Turner
On Saturday, November 5, 2016, Wes Turner wrote: > For automated deployment / continuous deployment / "continuous delivery": > > - pip maintains a local cache > - devpi can be configured as a transparent proxy cache (in front of > pypi.org) >

Re: [Distutils] continuous integration options (was Re: Travis-CI is not open source, except in fact it *is* open source)

2016-11-05 Thread Wes Turner
For automated deployment / continuous deployment / "continuous delivery": - pip maintains a local cache - devpi can be configured as a transparent proxy cache (in front of pypi.org ) - GitLab CI can show a checkmark for a deploy pipeline stage On Saturday, November 5, 2016, Wes Turner

Re: [Distutils] continuous integration options (was Re: Travis-CI is not open source, except in fact it *is* open source)

2016-11-05 Thread Wes Turner
On Saturday, November 5, 2016, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 4 November 2016 at 06:07, Nathaniel Smith > > wrote: > > I think we're drifting pretty far off topic here... IIRC the original > > discussion was about whether the travis-ci infrastructure

Re: [Distutils] Current Python packaging status (from my point of view)

2016-11-05 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 4 November 2016 at 07:44, Chris Barker wrote: > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 3:39 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> >> I don't think there's much chance of any of this ever working on >> Windows - conda will rule there, and rightly so. Mac OS X seems likely >> to

Re: [Distutils] Current Python packaging status (from my point of view)

2016-11-05 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 4 November 2016 at 03:56, Matthew Brett wrote: >> But - it would be a huge help if the PSF could help with funding to >> get mingw-w64 working. This is the crucial blocker for progress on >>

Re: [Distutils] Current Python packaging status (from my point of view)

2016-11-05 Thread Matthew Brett
Hi, On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 4 November 2016 at 03:56, Matthew Brett wrote: >> But - it would be a huge help if the PSF could help with funding to >> get mingw-w64 working. This is the crucial blocker for progress on

Re: [Distutils] Current Python packaging status (from my point of view)

2016-11-05 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 4 November 2016 at 03:56, Matthew Brett wrote: > But - it would be a huge help if the PSF could help with funding to > get mingw-w64 working. This is the crucial blocker for progress on > binary wheels on Windows. Such a grant was already awarded earlier this year by

Re: [Distutils] continuous integration options (was Re: Travis-CI is not open source, except in fact it *is* open source)

2016-11-05 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 4 November 2016 at 06:07, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > I think we're drifting pretty far off topic here... IIRC the original > discussion was about whether the travis-ci infrastructure could be suborned > to provide an sdist->wheel autobuilding service for pypi. (Answer: maybe, >