Comments on: PythonPackaging == hot_action http://compoundthinking.com/blog/index.php/2008/09/26/python-packaging-ecosystem/ Thinking about programming in new ways Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:00:53 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Tushar http://compoundthinking.com/blog/index.php/2008/09/26/python-packaging-ecosystem/#comment-250013 Tushar Wed, 15 Oct 2008 10:17:34 +0000 http://compoundthinking.com/blog/?p=439#comment-250013 I'm a long time user of python and recently have managed to lead my company towards using python for major development work. We use <a href="http://pyinstaller.python-hosting.com/" rel="nofollow">PyInstaller</a> (note: not 'pyinstall') to create .exe files on Windows and distribute clean, fully encapsulated binaries for Linux and Windows platforms. PyInstaller is *great* software and makes production-class development in python _possible_. Personally, I would *really* like to see PyInstaller integrated into the standard library along with a whole (modern) set of packaging and distribution tools. I've used distutils and setuptools in the past, and I'm continually frustrated that they don't do what I want in a sufficiently obvious way (tearing my hair out is getting tiresome!). Python programming is normally the opposite: a joy and a pleasure: let's make packaging and distribution the same. It really is time now for a new start. AMK hit the nail on the head when he said "what would you want if you were thinking afresh?". So, here's "What I Want": * BINARY installations (this is the real world folks - I want to sell & distibute products in binary form!) * pyc-only distributions (cf java class files) * source distributions * standard python packages (which can work on multiple platforms) * integration with platform installers where possible (think of Windows MSI, debian apt, RPM, autopackage, etc) * simple command line tools to do all of the above (so that I can integrate into a continuous build environment) (P.S. If anyone has any good ideas on the pyc front, please let me know as that's what I'm looking into at the moment that brought me here in the first place.) I’m a long time user of python and recently have managed to lead my company towards using python for major development work. We use PyInstaller (note: not ‘pyinstall’) to create .exe files on Windows and distribute clean, fully encapsulated binaries for Linux and Windows platforms. PyInstaller is *great* software and makes production-class development in python _possible_.

Personally, I would *really* like to see PyInstaller integrated into the standard library along with a whole (modern) set of packaging and distribution tools.

I’ve used distutils and setuptools in the past, and I’m continually frustrated that they don’t do what I want in a sufficiently obvious way (tearing my hair out is getting tiresome!). Python programming is normally the opposite: a joy and a pleasure: let’s make packaging and distribution the same.

It really is time now for a new start. AMK hit the nail on the head when he said “what would you want if you were thinking afresh?”.

So, here’s “What I Want”:
* BINARY installations (this is the real world folks – I want to sell & distibute products in binary form!)
* pyc-only distributions (cf java class files)
* source distributions
* standard python packages (which can work on multiple platforms)
* integration with platform installers where possible (think of Windows MSI, debian apt, RPM, autopackage, etc)
* simple command line tools to do all of the above (so that I can integrate into a continuous build environment)

(P.S. If anyone has any good ideas on the pyc front, please let me know as that’s what I’m looking into at the moment that brought me here in the first place.)

]]> By: Ian Bicking http://compoundthinking.com/blog/index.php/2008/09/26/python-packaging-ecosystem/#comment-244549 Ian Bicking Thu, 02 Oct 2008 03:00:34 +0000 http://compoundthinking.com/blog/?p=439#comment-244549 I'd rather see binary installation handled by some other tool that takes a source distribution and rewrites it as a binary installation. pyinstall works pretty well, but if it took on binary installation (that actually works, because eggs alone don't work all that well) then it'd be much more challenging. (Though to be fair, eggs just on Windows work okay.) I’d rather see binary installation handled by some other tool that takes a source distribution and rewrites it as a binary installation. pyinstall works pretty well, but if it took on binary installation (that actually works, because eggs alone don’t work all that well) then it’d be much more challenging. (Though to be fair, eggs just on Windows work okay.)

]]> By: Mark Ramm http://compoundthinking.com/blog/index.php/2008/09/26/python-packaging-ecosystem/#comment-244203 Mark Ramm Tue, 30 Sep 2008 21:09:00 +0000 http://compoundthinking.com/blog/?p=439#comment-244203 Chris, You mean Zed's easy_@(#$* uninstall isn't enough for you. You want something that actually cleans up after itself! Now you're just dreaming ;) But in all seriousness pyinstall keeps track of all the files that get installed so it would be a lot easier to extend it to do uninstalls. Chris,

You mean Zed’s easy_@(#$* uninstall isn’t enough for you. You want something that actually cleans up after itself!

Now you’re just dreaming ;)

But in all seriousness pyinstall keeps track of all the files that get installed so it would be a lot easier to extend it to do uninstalls.

]]> By: Chris Perkins http://compoundthinking.com/blog/index.php/2008/09/26/python-packaging-ecosystem/#comment-244189 Chris Perkins Tue, 30 Sep 2008 20:30:37 +0000 http://compoundthinking.com/blog/?p=439#comment-244189 This is great news, and thanks Mark for wrapping it up with a nice bow for all of us. I am especially excited to hear that setup.py will go away as an interface for setuptools. I also agree that better support for binaries needs to be addressed. One of the things that I really want is an easy_uninstall that actually works! I'm guessing this has to be on the hit-list. This is great news, and thanks Mark for wrapping it up with a nice bow for all of us. I am especially excited to hear that setup.py will go away as an interface for setuptools. I also agree that better support for binaries needs to be addressed.

One of the things that I really want is an easy_uninstall that actually works! I’m guessing this has to be on the hit-list.

]]>