> The Python sandbox has a setuptools directory. Is this the canonical
> location for the code?
Yes, it is.
> If so, then anybody who has Python commit
> privileges can commit to it and help further develop setuptools.
They can, but they shouldn't. Nothing should be committed there
without
At 05:15 PM 3/19/2008 -0500, Jeff Rush wrote:
>Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> > At 03:57 AM 3/19/2008 -0500, Jeff Rush wrote:
> >> Are you open to giving certain others patch view/commit privileges to
> >> setuptools?
> >
> > Jim Fulton has such already. I'm open to extending that to others who
> > have
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> At 03:57 AM 3/19/2008 -0500, Jeff Rush wrote:
>> Are you open to giving certain others patch view/commit privileges to
>> setuptools?
>
> Jim Fulton has such already. I'm open to extending that to others who
> have a good grasp of the subtleties involved.
>
> Truthfully
Phillip J. Eby writes:
> >7. Many wanted to ability to install files anywhere in the install tree and
> > not just under the Python package. Under distutils this was possible
> > but
> > it was removed in setuptools for security reasons.
>
> It wasn't security, it was manageability. Egg
Jeff Rush writes:
> I was in a Packaging BoF yesterday and, although not very relevant to the
> packager bootstrap thread, Guido has asked me to post some of the concerns.
We did address many topics on both days, I added the following topics
which were addressed on the Friday BoF only, see
http:/
At 03:57 AM 3/19/2008 -0500, Jeff Rush wrote:
>Are you open to giving certain others patch view/commit privileges
>to setuptools?
Jim Fulton has such already. I'm open to extending that to others
who have a good grasp of the subtleties involved.
Truthfully, if we can just get 0.6 put to bed, I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 19, 2008, at 3:57 AM, Jeff Rush wrote:
>
> I and others appreciate your call for more patches on various
> topics. However
> a long delay in applying them will discourage contribution. Are you
> open to
> giving certain others patch view/c
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>
> I'm actually happy to hear that there's this much energy available --
> hopefully some of it can be harnessed towards positive solutions.
>
> When I began developing setuptools, I often asked for the input of
> packagers, developers, etc., through the distutils-sig...
At 05:10 PM 3/17/2008 -0500, Jeff Rush wrote:
>I was in a Packaging BoF yesterday and, although not very relevant to the
>packager bootstrap thread, Guido has asked me to post some of the concerns.
>
>The BoF drew about 15 people, many of whom were packagers for Red Hat, Ubuntu
>and such. Everyone
