On 16 November 2017 at 22:33, Miro Hrončok <mhroncok(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Adding the link makes sense to me. Adding all the macros definition
to the
wiki does not make sense to me, but form different reasons. I think that
having %py3_build_egg and %py3_install_egg there is just not necessary.
Since there are more files at [0] I'd just add that link.
[0]
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-rpm-macros/tree/master
Even though it's just a new informational link, I'm guessing we still need
to file an FPC ticket for that?
About flit:
* is this way of creating Python distributions getting more and
more popular?
It is - Thomas Kluyver (flit's creator) is actually driving a lot of work
to get pip's pluggable build system support working properly.
The key differences between it and setuptools are:
1. It's designed specifically for pure Python projects
2. It assumes it can get the list of files to package from git
Those two assumptions sweep away a *lot* of the complexity in setuptools,
and hence make flit far more beginner friendly.
* if so, should we add a new section of the guidelines? something
like
"Packaging setup.py-less projects"?
Rather than emphasising the absence of setup.py, I'd emphasise the use of
wheel files:
* "Defining an RPM based on a wheel build process"
* "Defining an RPM based on a setup.py file"
The latter would just be a renamed
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Example_common_spec_file -
that is the setup.py based build process, but it isn't currently obvious
that `pyX_build` and `pyX_install` assume the use of a setup.py file.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan(a)gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia