Le 29/07/2015 18:12, Clay Gerrard a écrit :
I agree an error message is better than breaking for insane reasons.
But... maybe as an aside... what about not breaking?
Well, yes, but *who* wants to do that?
Old versions of setuptoolsl, pip and pbr have a lot of issues. It will
be a nightmare t
Le 29/07/2015 10:27, Robert Collins a écrit :
Similar to pbr, we have a minimum version of setuptools required to
consistently install things in OpenStack. Right now thats 17.1.
However, we don't declare a setup_requires version for it.
I think we should.
If it's possible to explicit the mini
On 30 July 2015 at 05:27, Robert Collins wrote:
> Similar to pbr, we have a minimum version of setuptools required to
> consistently install things in OpenStack. Right now thats 17.1.
>
> However, we don't declare a setup_requires version for it.
>
> I think we should.
>
> setuptools can't self-up
On 30 July 2015 at 13:12, Clay Gerrard wrote:
> I agree an error message is better than breaking for insane reasons.
>
> But... maybe as an aside... what about not breaking?
>
> How come the openstack ecosystem doesn't have wait for PEP 426 to be
> approved and for setuptools 17.1 to be widely dep
I agree an error message is better than breaking for insane reasons.
But... maybe as an aside... what about not breaking?
How come the openstack ecosystem doesn't have wait for PEP 426 to be
approved and for setuptools 17.1 to be widely deployed before it can
require/depend on it? Is there no fa
Similar to pbr, we have a minimum version of setuptools required to
consistently install things in OpenStack. Right now thats 17.1.
However, we don't declare a setup_requires version for it.
I think we should.
setuptools can't self-upgrade, and we don't have declarative deps yet,
so one reaction
