[Python-Dev] Status of packaging in 3.3 (original) (raw)

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Thu Jun 21 16:03:51 CEST 2012

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:31 PM, PJ Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:

So, if we are to draw any lesson from the past, it would seem to be, "make sure that the people who'll be doing the work are actually going to be available through to the next Python version".

Thanks for that write-up - I learned quite a few things I didn't know, even though I was actually around for 2.5 development (the fact I had less of a vested interest in packaging issues then probably made a big difference, too).

After all, if they are not, it may not much matter whether the code is in the stdlib or not.  ;-)

Yeah, I think Tarek had the right idea with working through the slow painful process of reaching consensus from the bottom up, feature by feature - we just got impatient and tried to skip to the end without working through the rest of the list.

It's worth reflecting on the progress we've made so far, and looking ahead to see what else remains

In the standard library for 3.3:

Packaging tool interoperability standards as Accepted PEPs (may still require further tweaks):

As I noted earlier in the thread, it would be good to see the components of distutils2/packaging aimed at this interoperability level split out as a separate utility library that can more easily be shared between projects (distmeta was my suggested name for such a PyPI project)

Other components where python-dev has a role to play as an interoperability clearing house:

Other components where python-dev has a role to play in smoothing the entry of beginners into the Python ecosystem:

Other components where standard library inclusion is a "nice-to-have" but not critical:

Cheers, Nick.

-- Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list