Kevin Dangoor wrote:
So, I saw Martijn's "paver: buildout is utterly doomed" message on
Tuesday, but I haven't had a chance to respond to it until now.
I knew you'd find out. :)
As Kent points out immediately following, I plan to use zc.buildout's
machinery. I actively use zc.buildout now, and I'm looking forward to
getting my buildout merged into my pavement.py.
Yes, I hadn't seen this until after I wrote that message. I'm glad to
hear so! There are packaging and distribution problems that both
projects share too, and I hope eventually some solutions to these
problems can go into setuptools. If you're interested in hearing more
about the problems we've been experiencing I'd be happy to talk about
I totally agree with Martijn that buildout needs a better website and
I'm glad to see that Baiju is going forward with that.
Ultimately, though, I think that people will choose to use buildout
alone or paver+buildout (or maybe paver+virtualenv, depending on their
tastes) completely based on what fits their brains better.
While I fully agree that's an important factor, presentation counts too.
Zope's attention to good presentation has been, let's say, lacking. I
was rather empathic, deliberately.
I emailed a fair bit with Zed Shaw about his Vellum tool. He adamantly
opposes having his builds defined in a full-blown language (ie Python),
whereas for my needs I really want to define my builds in Python. But I
want it to be easier to do than what you get with the Python standard
People who prefer to keep there build information in a "data" format
will no doubt stick with buildout. I have no problem with that. My goal
is just to share the workload with other people who have similar build
and deployment problems to the ones I have.
I can certainly see benefits to both approaches, and I think there's
enough room to support both. But I think better presentation and
speaking to Python programmers matters so much I think zc.buildout
stands rather weakly in competition with Paver right now. This needs to
What I like about buildout's recipe approach is that it creates an
ecosystem of reusable recipes, and gets people to think about
declarative ways to get things done. If you could've gotten your problem
solved by writing 5 lines of python, the recipe might not be around. On
the other hand, the benefit is that you'd be done after 5 lines of
I believe I read somewhere about Paver having a goal to have projects
install directly from PyPI (with a single command), is that correct?
That would be interesting.
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -