On 15.12.2016 21:01, Ben Finney wrote: > On 15-Dec-2016, Matthias Klose wrote: >> On 15.12.2016 16:00, Barry Warsaw wrote: >>> Does it ever make sense to install pkg_resources and not install >>> setuptools? > > Yes. The ‘pkg_resources’ library allows a program to access its > package resources, while most Python programs don't need to build > Python distributions and hence don't need Setuptools. > >> https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/issues/863 > > Thanks for raising that. > >> disagreed, dput should just remove setuptools from the requires. > > The ‘setuptools’ library *is* needed to build the package. Are you > saying that it does not belong in the ‘install_requires’ list?
my understanding is that the exception is raised when people try to run dput without having python-setuptools installed. so yes, for the debian context, you should remove it from the ‘install_requires’ list and make sure that python-pkg-resources ends up in the package's Depends. > On 15-Dec-2016, Barry Warsaw wrote: >> I agree that the bug should be fixed in dput. It's up to dput's >> maintainer to decide how I suppose. Sounds like there's agreement we >> should reassign this bug back to dput. > > I am not yet convinced :-) Please explain how the ‘setup.py’ is > incorrect now? it's incorrect in the Debian context, where we have the split pkg-resources/setuptools packages. In the past we needed that to be able to build packages without setuptools but using pkg_resources. the pkg_resources should not check for the presence of the setuptools egg at runtime. Matthias
