[Twisted-Python] Subproject releases

[Matt Goodall]

Moof wrote:
> David Reid wrote:
> 
>>On Oct 11, 2005, at 10:49 PM, glyph at divmod.com <mailto:glyph at divmod.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I remember participating in this initial discussion.
>>>
>>>I remember taking some side in it, and arguing strongly for that side.
>>>
>>>I'm not sure which one it was, so if I'm responsible for rejecting it
>>>I've changed my mind, but if I was arguing in favor of it I'm now even
>>>more vociferous :).
>>
>>
>>Just in the interest of clarity, I'm fairly certain you argued against
>>this, because of the pain it would cause the developer involved in all
>>aspects of Twisted as opposed to just one or two subprojects.  Then I
>>wrote pthy, to try to make that kind of thing easier, no one used it,
>>and now apparently you've written Combinator to do the same thing in a
>>different and all together better way.  So I support this kind of change.  
> 
> 
> Out of interest, How do these solutions relate to all the fancy metapackage
> stuff you can do with setuptools?

If the projects are separate it would be much easier, although there are
other issues in the Twisted code that make zip safe eggs difficult right
now.

setuptools's namespace packages requires (AFAICT) the package components
to be in separate directories.

One thing to be wary of ... using setuptools namespace packages seems to
force you down the pkg_resources.require('xyz') route. That is good or
bad, depending on your viewpoint ;-).

Personally, I would like Twisted eggs and I would be happy to help out
with this. It *would* mean some changes to the Twisted code though -
some of it simple (killing __file__ references), some of it a bit more
tricky (plugin's dropin.cache).

Anyway, let's not let this descend into a setuptools vs <insert
favourite package manager> flame fest. Making eggs possible are just one
of many goals that may be helped by separating Twisted projects.

- Matt

> 
> Much of the python world seems to be migrating towards setuptools as a way
> to distribute their packages and cope with fun things like dependencies.
> Certainly I'd hope that I could say "depends on twisted.core and
> twisted.web" on future packages that I might be developing. It even has
> so-called "Namespace package" support, which initially seems geared towards
> Zope's package structure, but might well do for twisted, too. And if it's
> not ok for twisted, then now is the right time to pipe up at the developers
> (which seem to be lead by Phillip J Eby) and get some changes made, as it's
> still in a robust alpha stage.
> 
> <http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/setuptools#namespace-packages>
> 
> I think it'd be a huge shame for twisted not to release eggs in the future,
> this stuff is not even beta, and it's already got wide acceptance and usage
> out in the web framework world, amongst others. And now's the time to get it
> right, at least as far as setuptools is concerned.
> 
> Moof

-- 
     __
    /  \__     Matt Goodall, Pollenation Internet Ltd
    \__/  \    w: http://www.pollenation.net
  __/  \__/    e: matt at pollenation.net
 /  \__/  \    t: +44 (0)113 2252500
 \__/  \__/
 /  \          Any views expressed are my own and do not necessarily
 \__/          reflect the views of my employer.