[Distutils] distlib updated with resources API

[Tarek Ziadé]

On 9/27/12 6:37 PM, Georg Brandl wrote:
> On 09/27/2012 05:49 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>> On 9/27/12 5:40 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>>> Tarek Ziadé <tarek <at> ziade.org> writes:
>>>>> There are two of us maintaining hg.python.org: Georg and I. So, I 
>>>>> don't
>>>>> know about Georg, but I don't want to maintain repositories for every
>>>>> third-party library that might one day become part of Python. 
>>>>> OTOH, if
>>>>> Georg wants to handle it, then fine
>>>> Since I see distutils2, unittest2, stackless and many users repo in 
>>>> there,
>>>> Please define the exact rules here - rather than you willingness to do
>>>> the benevolent work.
>>>>
>>>> and what you mean by maintaining an extra repo exactly.
>>> Maintaining a repo means setting it up and possibly changing the 
>>> configuration
>>> (e.g. commit hooks) when required. This is all done by hand by one 
>>> of us.
>>>
>>> My main point is not that hg.p.o is closed to new repositories, but 
>>> that it is
>>> not meant to become a "forge" or an incubator where anyone can 
>>> create new
>>> Python repos. Is distlib important enough yet?
>>
>> I don't know what you mean by 'important'
>>
>> We removed packaging from Python and said we would work on a smaller set
>> for inclusion.
>>
>> I've also said that I believed that it's simpler to include back wrt
>> licensing if it's a code base
>> that's under the contributors agreement.
>>
>> Last but not least, distlib is the plan forward endorsed by python-dev,
>> so having it
>> in hg.python.org makes that plan more legitimate, no ?
>
> No, but I can see why you want it there, and I for one have no problems
> creating and maintaining that repository.

Ok thanks
>
>> I frankly don't follow your reluctance here, and I find your definition
>> of what can
>> be in hg.python.org to be very vague
>
> And we'd like to keep it that way.
>
>> When I asked for a distutils2 repository it was done in 2 minutes and I
>> did not
>> have to argue for hours and potentially push the discussion to yet
>> another packaging drama
>>
>> This is really annoying  :/
>
> Are you sure you're not overreacting?
>

Of course I am