From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id iHg3NrJ0qV97cQAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 16:56:18 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id WBEjMrJ0qV8+dAAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 16:56:18 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 673BF940119 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 16:56:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:39836 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kcASn-0006Lu-8h for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:56:17 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56788) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kcARK-00062W-V6 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:54:46 -0500 Received: from mail-out.m-online.net ([2001:a60:0:28:0:1:25:1]:33463) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kcARI-0002TI-AP for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:54:46 -0500 Received: from frontend01.mail.m-online.net (unknown [192.168.8.182]) by mail-out.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CVHCg71WLz1rwFJ for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (dynscan1.mnet-online.de [192.168.6.70]) by mail.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CVHCg6wD9z1qyX2 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:39 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mnet-online.de Received: from mail.mnet-online.de ([192.168.8.182]) by localhost (dynscan1.mail.m-online.net [192.168.6.70]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4LXQk0UwmdVJ for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from hermia.goebel-consult.de (ppp-188-174-48-59.dynamic.mnet-online.de [188.174.48.59]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.mnet-online.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from lenashee.goebel-consult.de (lenashee.goebel-consult.de [192.168.110.2]) by hermia.goebel-consult.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33EB060272 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:55:08 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: Questions regarding Python packaging To: guix-devel@gnu.org References: <20201108142717.lmud5h4gh44vtjc6@melmoth> From: Hartmut Goebel Organization: crazy-compilers.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:36 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201108142717.lmud5h4gh44vtjc6@melmoth> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Received-SPF: none client-ip=2001:a60:0:28:0:1:25:1; envelope-from=h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com; helo=mail-out.m-online.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/11/09 11:54:40 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer X-Spam_score_int: -25 X-Spam_score: -2.6 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Scanner: ns3122888.ip-94-23-21.eu Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.01 X-TUID: X8DbMvmY0yYN Hi, seems like another messages of mine, regarding the first thread  about a poetry build system, did not make it to the list. Am 08.11.20 um 15:27 schrieb Tanguy Le Carrour: > I've just learned, by accident (working on `python-keyring` [1]), that > `python setup.py install` was somehow deprecated This statement is not exactly true - well, depending on interpretation of "somehow". I've not set seen an official deprecation. It's true that users are encouraged to use pip for installing packages. But the official Python Packaging Tutorial [1] is still based on setuptools (not even recommending a setup.cfg file). Thus setuptools will be around for quite some more time, as will "python setup.py install". In the future Python world, any build-tool can be specified in "pyproject.toml". User will then call "pip install", and pip will (AFAIU) call a Python function (aka entry-point) specified in that file. (If this file does not exist, setuptools are assumed). For our python-build-system, we would use "pip wheel" (for phase build) and "pip install" (for phase install). So, if we switch to "pip wheel" and "pip install", different python build systems could share a common base, just redefining some dependencies (setuptools, poetry, build, ...) and some tool-dependent flags. Is this the direction you are working towards? [1] https://packaging.python.org/tutorials/packaging-projects/ > in favor of tools like`pep517` or `build`. Thanks for point to these, both are new to me. "build" sounds interesting, esp. for guix: "It is a simple build tool and does not perform any dependency management." This would help us spliting dependency management and build phase. Anyhow, it's quite new (half an year old) and implements a PEP 517 package builder - and PEP 517 (defining the build system in pyproject.toml) is not yet adopted widely. "pep517" seems o be a library used for "build". Its high-level interface has been deprecated in favor for "build". I as just about to write "So, while this might be one road to go, this is not of much use for us yet.". Anyhow, this might be a good base for pep517 based packages. On the other hand: Maybe we'd better stick with "pip wheel" and "pip install", see above. -- Regards Hartmut Goebel | Hartmut Goebel | h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com | | www.crazy-compilers.com | compilers which you thought are impossible |