Ian Bicking wrote:
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.
Is there a simple, well written setup.py you would suggest to look at to
get an idea of how it might look for an activity? Also trying to
actually write something like
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Sugar_Activity_Tutorial (the code, not the
tutorial) using setuptools could really be interesting.
Marco
_______________________________________________
Sugar mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.laptop.org/mailman/listinfo/sugar
