Opened 14 years ago

Closed 14 years ago

#22403 closed enhancement (fixed)

replace setuptools with distribute

Reported by: akitada@… Owned by: jmroot (Joshua Root)
Priority: Normal Milestone:
Component: ports Version: 1.8.1
Keywords: Cc: MarcusCalhoun-Lopez (Marcus Calhoun-Lopez), stechert@…, macports.org@…
Port: py26-distribute py25-distribute py26-setuptools py25-setuptools

Change History (10)

comment:1 Changed 14 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)

If I understand what you're suggesting here, why would we not just make setuptools replaced_by distribute?

comment:2 in reply to:  1 Changed 14 years ago by akitada@…

Replying to jmr@…:

If I understand what you're suggesting here, why would we not just make setuptools replaced_by distribute?

Because I think setuptools and distribute ports should be kept as different ports for up coming Distribute 0.7 release. Distribute 0.7 is, unline 0.6, going to drop setuptools compatibility. I propose to use name "setuptools" for Distribute 0.6 and "distribute" for Distribute 0.7.

comment:3 Changed 14 years ago by macports.org@…

Why not distribute0.6 for Distribute 0.6 and distribute for >= 0.7?

There are people who (still) want to actual setuptools, not distribute, because they feel it's been better tested and they're not confident in distribute yet. Furthermore, since he's been threatened of irrelevance PJE has started working on Setuptools again.

As a result, I really don't think setuptools's code should just be replaced by distribute's in the setuptools port. Plus it'd be a lie.

comment:4 Changed 14 years ago by macports.org@…

Cc: macports.org@… added

Cc Me!

comment:5 in reply to:  3 Changed 14 years ago by akitada@…

Replying to macports.org@…:

Why not distribute0.6 for Distribute 0.6 and distribute for >= 0.7?

There are people who (still) want to actual setuptools, not distribute, because they feel it's been better tested and they're not confident in distribute yet. Furthermore, since he's been threatened of irrelevance PJE has started working on Setuptools again.

As a result, I really don't think setuptools's code should just be replaced by distribute's in the setuptools port. Plus it'd be a lie.

Distribute *is* a lie and but it's a good one. Do you have any specific issues that Distribute fails but setuptools just works? setuptools port has been already spreaded in MacPorts and I think it's the easiest way of providing better software to users. (Let me say this again. Yes, you're right. it's a lie)

comment:6 Changed 14 years ago by macports.org@…

Distribute *is* a lie and but it's a good one.

Yes and no. Distribute is a fork exposing a setuptools module, but you know what when you're installing *distribute*. What if people install this distribute-renamed-to-setuptools and start sending feedback to setuptools on that subject? What sense does it make?

Do you have any specific issues that Distribute fails but setuptools just works?

Me? No, I'm just echoing feedback I've found on the distutils, distribute and setuptools mailing lists.

I think it's the easiest way of providing better software to users.

That's all fine and dandy, but it shouldn't be done by telling users that distribute is setuptools. It's not.

comment:7 in reply to:  6 Changed 14 years ago by akitada@…

Yes and no. Distribute is a fork exposing a setuptools module, but you know what when you're installing *distribute*. What if people install this distribute-renamed-to-setuptools and start sending feedback to setuptools on that subject? What sense does it make?

I checked with Tarek, who's the core developer of distirubute and the maintainer of Distribute itself. He said he watches setuptools bug queue so if sending feedback to setputools on distribute actually helpful.

Do you have any specific issues that Distribute fails but setuptools just works?

Me? No, I'm just echoing feedback I've found on the distutils, distribute and setuptools mailing lists.

Well, I think I can pick some of the issues in setuptools that's fixed on distribute, if you like.

I think it's the easiest way of providing better software to users.

That's all fine and dandy, but it shouldn't be done by telling users that distribute is setuptools. It's not.

I understand your concern, but I still think this would makes users happier. Apparently I'm not the only who think it's better. This strategy is actually what Debian and Gentoo do for their package. (Ubuntu will be soon)

I'd like to hear from setuptools/distribute MacPorts port maintainers on this.

comment:8 Changed 14 years ago by akitada@…

Port: py26-distribute py-setuptools py25-setuptools py26-distribute added

comment:9 Changed 14 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)

Cc: mcalhoun@… stechert@… added
Owner: changed from mcalhoun@… to jmr@…
Port: py25-distribute py26-setuptools added; py-setuptools removed
Status: newassigned

In a couple days, if nobody raises a good objection, I'm going to change all py25 and py26 dependencies on setuptools to distribute, and make the corresponding setuptools ports replaced_by distribute.

comment:10 Changed 14 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)

Keywords: setuptools distribute removed
Resolution: fixed
Status: assignedclosed
Summary: 'distribute' under the name of 'setuptools'replace setuptools with distribute

Done in r65907 and r65908.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.