On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: > >> [...] > >> > I believe that this would also break both 'easy_install numpy', and > >> > attempts to install numpy via the setup_requires= argument to > >> > setuptools.setup (because setup_requires= implicitly calls > >> > easy_install). install_requires= would *not* be affected, and > >> > setup_requires= would still be fine in cases where numpy was already > >> > installed. > >> > >> On further investigation, it looks like the simplest approach to doing > >> this would actually treat easy_install and setup_requires= the same > >> way as they treat pip, i.e., they would all be allowed. (I was > >> misreading some particularly confusing code in setuptools.) > >> > >> It also looks like easy_installed packages can at least be safely > >> upgraded, so I guess allowing this is okay :-). > > > > > > I just discovered https://bitbucket.org/dholth/setup-requires, which > ensures > > that setup_requires uses pip instead of easy_install. So we can not only > > keep setup-requires working, but make it work significantly better. > > IIUC this is not something that we (= numpy) could use ourselves, but > instead something that everyone who does setup_requires=["numpy"] > would have to set up in their individual projects? > Right. I was thinking about using it in scipy. Ah well, I'm sure we can manage to not break ``setup_requires=numpy`` in some way. Ralf
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
