Store config in setup.cfg and update setuptools configuration#57
Conversation
4383
force-pushed
the
update/distribute
branch
11 times, most recently
from
8351971 to
850ae9c
Compare
|
There was a discussion about doing this in #56 and pypa/packaging.python.org#378 and the conclusion was that it's a bit too early to move to Personally, I like the feature, but I can see that we want to be cautious of making it the standard when there's likely to be plenty of people on older versions of tools. BTW, it would be easier to manage this PR if you focused it just on the |
4383
force-pushed
the
update/distribute
branch
2 times, most recently
from
a3f30a9 to
1de805d
Compare
|
@pfmoore Thanks for your comment. travis modifications not introduce changes on tests just import python version specificaly. |
|
|
pfmoore
left a comment
pfmoore
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
First of all, as noted in the issues I referenced, I don't think this will be accepted in the short term. But if you want to prepare something that could be considered in the future, then there are a number of issues that I'd like to see addressed.
| script: tox | ||
| script: | ||
| - tox -e $(echo py$TRAVIS_PYTHON_VERSION | tr -d .) | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The changes to this file are not related to switching to setup.cfg, so they should be split out into a separate PR (with an explanation of why the changes are needed - are the tests failing as things stand?).
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def _extract_version(package_name): | ||
| try: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is code that we're recommending everyone include in their projects - I don't think we want an _extract_version like this, or pkg_resources and setuptools dependencies, in such a recommendation.
The existing code doesn't offer a "get the package version" function, or try to address how the application should expose its version at runtime. I'd rather that remain the case, but even if we were to decide that we do that, it should be a separate PR (again!)
| return _conf['metadata']['version'] | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| __version__ = _extract_version('pipenv') |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why the reference to pipenv here?
|
|
||
| def main(): | ||
| """Entry point for the application script""" | ||
| print("Sample version {}".format(__version__)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a stub for people to write their application code - why print the version here?
|
|
||
|
|
||
| if __name__ == "__main__": | ||
| print(__version__) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
__init__.py isn't typically executable. What's the point of this change?
| recursive-include data * | ||
|
|
||
| # Include package data | ||
| include sample/package_data.dat |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this just because of the "if you are using Python 2.6, it should be in MANIFEST.in comment below? If so, then (a) it's not specific to this PR, it's a change that applies to the existing code as well, but (b) we don't support Python 2.6 according to setup.py/setup.cfg, so we don't need it anyway.
4383
force-pushed
the
update/distribute
branch
7 times, most recently
from
09181c9 to
41825c6
Compare
|
@pfmoore changes applied! |
4383
force-pushed
the
update/distribute
branch
from
41825c6 to
6cf9e15
Compare
|
https://packaging.python.org/tutorials/distributing-packages/#setup-cfg I think this documentation must be updated, it's reference setup.cfg on sampleproject but sampleproject don't use this practice at this moment |
|
The docs refer to Just because we don't give an example of (or recommend) the relatively new setuptools extension to allow most of |
|
@pfmoore ok thanks for response :) |
[Fix] Add zip_safe option
4383
changed the title
2 participants
Overview
Move setup configuration to setup.cfg insteadof setup.py.
Features