[Python-Dev] Status of packaging in 3.3

[Tarek Ziadé]

On 6/21/12 4:26 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
>
>> project should give me so I can compile its extensions ?" I think this
>> has nothing to do with the tools/implementations.
> If you sit down and ask your self: "what are the information a python
>
> I'm not sure if I understand. A project can't "give the information 
> needed to build it". The build system is an integrated piece of the 
> code and package itself. Making the build of library X work on some 
> ugly HPC setup Y is part of the development of X.
>
> To my mind a solution looks something like (and Bento is close to this):
>
>  Step 1) "Some standard" to do configuration of a package (--prefix 
> and other what-goes-where options, what libraries to link with, what 
> compilers to use...)
>
>  Step 2) Launch the package's custom build system (may be Unix shell 
> script or makefile in some cases (sometimes portability is not a 
> goal), may be a waf build)
>
>  Step 3) "Some standard" to be able to cleanly 
> install/uninstall/upgrade the product of step 2)
>
> An attempt to do Step 2) in a major way in the packaging framework 
> itself, and have the package just "declare" its C extensions, would 
> not work. It's fine to have a way in the packaging framework that 
> works for trivial cases, but it's impossible to create something that 
> works for every case.

I think we should, as you proposed, list a few projects w/ compilation 
needs -- from the simplest to the more complex, then see how a standard 
*description* could be used by any tool


>
>>
>> And if we're able to write down in a PEP this, e.g. the information a
>> compiler is looking for to do its job, then any tool out there waf,
>> scons, cmake, jam, ant, etc, can do the job, no ?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Anyway: I really don't want to start a flame-war here. So let's accept
>>> up front that we likely won't agree here; I just wanted to clarify my
>>> position.
>> After 4 years I still don't understand what "we won't agree" means in
>> this context. *NO ONE* ever ever came and told me : here's what I want a
>> Python project to describe for its extensions.
>
> That's unfortunate. To be honest, it's probably partly because it's 
> easier to say what won't work than come with a constructive 
> suggestion. A lot of people (me included) just use 
> waf/cmake/autotools, and forget about making the code installable 
> through PyPI or any of the standard Python tools. Just because that 
> works *now* for us, but we don't have any good ideas for how to make 
> this into something that works on a wider scale.
>
> I think David is one of the few who has really dug into the matter and 
> tried to find something that can both do builds and work through 
> standard install mechanisms. I can't answer for why you haven't been 
> able to understand one another.
>
> It may also be an issue with how much one can constructively do on 
> mailing lists. Perhaps the only route forward is to to bring people 
> together in person and walk distutils2 people through some hairy 
> scientific HPC builds (and vice versa).

Like versions scheme, I think it's fine if you guys have a more complex 
system to build software. But there should be a way to share a common 
standard for complation, even if people that uses distutils2 or xxx, are 
just doing the dumbest things, like simple C libs compilation.

>
>> Just "we won't agree" or "distutils sucks" :)
>>
>>
>> Gosh I hope we will overcome this lock one day, and move forward :D
>
> Well, me too.
The other thing is, the folks in distutils2 and myself, have zero 
knowledge about compilers. That's why we got very frustrated not to see 
people with that knowledge come and help us in this area.

So, I reiterate my proposal, and it could also be expressed like this:

1/ David writes a PEP where he describes how Bento interact with a 
project -- metadata, description files, etc
2/ Someone from distutils2 completes the PEP by describing how setup.cfg 
works wrt Extensions
3/ we see if we can have a common standard even if it's a subset of 
bento capabilities




>
> Dag
> _______________________________________________
> 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/ziade.tarek%40gmail.com