[Python-Dev] Refactoring installation schemes

[Guido van Rossum]

David, you have an attitude problem. Your contributions (the post
below is just an example) don't sound healthy to me -- you just
complain and whine and denigrate Tarek's work. In a previous post you
claimed to have had a particular idea first (it doesn't matter which
idea) and you managed to make it sound bad that your idea was
eventually accepted. This is not a productive attitude.

Surely the problem isn't writing 300 lines of code. The problem is
getting everyone to agree on which 300 lines of code should be
written. That is the problem at hand, and claiming that nothing
happened because no code was written and all that was agreed on
amounts to 300 lines of code is outright demeaning.

Stop it. You are wearing out your welcome.

--Guido

PS. Submitting a counter-PEP to the peps editors that hasn't been
discussed on the SIG list at all is also a bad move. You really need
to change the way you try to interact with the SIG.

On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 2:29 PM, David Lyon <david.lyon at preisshare.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 11:35:41 +0100, Tarek Ziadé <ziade.tarek at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> PEP 376 is working on a default, unified, *installation* format, that
>> tries to gather the good ideas of Pip, Setuptools etc.. and propose a
>> unified format for our site-packages. This new standard will come with
>> APIs in pkgutil to be able to query installed distribution etc. This
>> work is also linked to PEP 345 work where we are modifying the
>> Metadata, and to PEP 386 that proposes a standard version comparison
>> scheme.
>
> Perphaps..
>
> But if you put all these PEPs together, implementing all the new features
> can't come to more than 300 lines of code...
>
> Since we hardly got anywhere on them in 2009, it will be interesting to
> see how much of it gets done in 2010.
>
>> But there's no plan to include a new *distribution* format in Distutils.
>
> I wasn't suggesting that - at all.
>
> And saying that 'eggs' are a *new* python package format isn't really
> really helpful because to my understanding they've been around for
> some number of years.
>
> No, i won't raise why we have EGG_INFO directories and a whole lot
> of half working egg stuff in standard python... I'm just asking
> why it can't be more consistant? while we're on the refactoring
> topic.
>
> Be fair...
>
> I'm saying finish what is already there.. or take out the crap ..
>
> It isn't fair to suggest that I am somehow asking for some big
> change when I am simply pointing out all the junk that's in
> there that's already half built.
>
>> In any case those PEPs are not finished yet, so everyone can help at
>> distutils-SIG
>
> True - and False.
>
> But I've been on the list for some twelve months asking for work
> to help out with, and haven't been assigned a single task to do
> yet.
>
> Seriously, if you won't allocate work out to people then how can
> it get done?
>
> Whilst I personally think a lot of the stuff in those PEPs is not
> high on quality, why don't we just get them implemented anyway?
>
> I'm a fairly proficient develper, but I can't get assigned a single
> work item..
>
> And to me, it doesn't seem any harder than just selecting 'djlyon'
> on the python tracker for some work items...
>
> Surely those PEPs all amount to 300+ lines of code. With two people
> working on it, that's only surely 150+ lines of code each... That
> shouldn't be such a big challenge for 2010..
>
> David
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org
>



-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)