[Distutils] Packaging situation + mailing list rules

[Tres Seaver]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 8:03 PM, P.J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
>> At 07:29 PM 7/3/2010 +0900, David Cournapeau wrote:
>>>  Besides the numerous technical issues, this is just basic decency. If
>>>  I were PJE, I would be very mad.
>> I'm not mad at it being provided with a compatible API.  However, I *am*
>> very unhappy with the fact that the version of distribute that's being
>> shipped with OS distributions is both packaged as (e.g.)
>> "python-setuptools", AND prevents people from installing the real
>> setuptools, even in a local directory!
> 
> That's not the intent. You can install setuptools if you want,
> globally, by removing distribute.
> You can install also a local setuptools.
> 
> If you can't do it, and your issue is not in #143, you can fill a bug
> in the distribute tracker.
> 
>> So, David, I hope you've filed this as a bug report with both Distribute and
>> Ubuntu, and that others will do the same for any other distribution that's
>> shipping distribute under a misleading name and that has this behavior.
> 
> This is now fixed in distribute and is getting fixed in distributions
> that use distribute,
> because we work TOGETHER.
> 
>> My understanding when this was discussed previously, was that distribute
>> would *only* suppress the installation of setuptools versions released
>> *before* the corresponding version of distribute.
>>
>> Also, considering how widespread the "setuptools isn't being maintained" lie
>> is at this point, I'm a bit concerned that some OS distributors may have
>> been unduly influenced by it in their switching decisions.
> 
> Setuptools has not been maintained over the last two years. You just
> have made a
> few changes lately, in reaction of the fork. Don't worry about the OS
> distributors, they are aware of the situation/
> 
> Again, a simple svn log in your repository when the fork happened and
> when OS distributions have switched, is enough to see that setuptools
> was not maintained.
> 
> If you are back on track and want to maintain it again, great ! maybe
> the fork will dissapear, for the very same reason it appeared: to
> avoid being locked by your 'glacial pace' (that's your words)
> 
> 
>> My understanding (and I would guess, that of the OS distributors' as well)
>> was *also* based on the premise that distribute was going to track with
>> setuptools' feature additions and bug fixes, which it clearly has not.  The
>> 0.6c11 release (last October) fixed a rather long list of bugs besides the
>> one you reported; does anyone know if the rest are actually fixed in
>> Distribute?
> 
> I have tracked that one single huge commit, and tried to backport everything.
> Obvisouly I missed something,. But I will double check again before I
> release 0.6.14,
> to avoid any flames here.

In that spirit, Tarek, you need to stop saying "setuptools is
unmaintained for the last 2 years":  PJE objects to it as unfactual, as
do I.  THe release last October makes that statement untrue on its face.

Please note as well that nothing about this is criticism of the choice
to fork, or any work you and others have done on distrbute, the PEPs,
distutils2, etc.



Tres.
- --
===================================================================
Tres Seaver          +1 540-429-0999          tseaver at palladion.com
Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"    http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkwvjjEACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ7CDACcDhcinnL2WzzH75KIeQrmNFcB
sg0An205oYtcSFH+eTh0h3craZTgcpgo
=9zjC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----