Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
There will be activities wrote in C, or activities based on application
already using auto*. Getting these to use distutils would not be
productive (if possible at all).
Agreed.
But we are going to have documentation on how to write activities and
bless a build system for activities that are written from scratch in
python (which should be the most common case). setuptools might be a
good candidate for this. It would be positive to think and experiment in
this direction. We want to be really easy to write activities. And I
would never put auto* and really easy in the same phrase :)
I envision *a* process for building a new app/bundle/activity that was
pure-Python to be:
* Create a proper setup.py (a fairly simple file)
* Maybe add a few settings to setup.cfg
* Run "python setup.py olpc_bundle"
And then you'll get a bundle, which I imagine will be a directory with a
few eggs (both your package, and any non-standard dependencies) and some
metadata taken from setup.cfg (whatever ends up in the bundle spec).
The setup.py file itself will probably just be a normal setup.py file
like people currently write.
--
Ian Bicking | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://blog.ianbicking.org
_______________________________________________
Sugar mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.laptop.org/mailman/listinfo/sugar
