RFE: drop bundled distlib
#10420
Comments
|
I'm neutral on this. I don't know if doing this could have unintended side-effects. |
|
Could you provide some context why you think depending on distlib is a bad thing? |
|
Also, we use distlib to generate script wrappers, and there's (to my knowledge) no viable alternative to distlib. Any proposal to remove distlib would need to explain how we continue to provide that functionality. (Note - the hard case here is Windows, where executable wrappers are needed). |
Simple I see that this module badly maintained.
I don't see anywhere else that this part of the 'distlib` is used. |
Because we would then have to maintain it (possibly even including the C source code for the executable wrappers). Let's just say this isn't going to happen. If someone were to release (and commit to maintaining) a replacement for the relevant parts of distlib, and someone submitted a PR to vendor the new library in place of distlib, then we might just possibly consider it. But even then, it's not obvious that such a PR would be accepted.
Your time would probably be better spent in that case helping distlib to maintain their code (assuming they agree with you that it's "badly maintained" - you should probably be more respectful of the time the distlib maintainers have put into it, and start from an assumption that there are reasons why things are the way that they are, before campaigning to get projects to drop distlib...) |
|
@kloczek, looks like distlib is still maintained: https://bitbucket.org/pypa/distlib/commits/ Last version released in May, with new commits after that. It uses some ancient backports and is still Python 2.7 compatible, this is not a huge problem per se. |
|
OTOH |
|
@ambv that is partially my point :P Maintainer seems is taking more care about python 2.x (which already +1.5y EOSed) than keep in good shape for latest python :/ |
|
FWIW, an alternative for generating script wrappers exists in installer now. |
|
None the less, @kloczek's reasoning for filing this issue:
This isn't based on facts, and isn't a good reason to drop distlib. Given their history of making weird requests to Python projects (asking many poetry/flit-based projects to add a setup.py, among other things) -- they've filed 100s issues on across many projects -- I'm inclined to suggest that folks don't spend extended periods of time or energy on this issue. |
|
I think we should discuss this changes. |
Honestly, I don't think we sould unless someone comes up with an actual justification for the proposal (one that isn't simply unsubstantiated criticism of distlib). |
I can point only on argument list of modules which are used by |
|
I reported a bug to them today about the pending Python 3.11 incompatibility and it's already fixed: https://bitbucket.org/pypa/distlib/issues/152/distlib-is-incompatible-with-python-311 |
pradyunsg
added
resolution: no action
Looks like
pipand virtualenv ar eonly two remaining modules which are still somehow connected withdistlib.pipseems is only bundlig distlib.I was not able to find anything else which still may be using
distlib.Going as well to create similar ticket for
virtualenv.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: