>> My question was less about the political aspects than the technical aspects. >> I gather you're saying that the fix to setuptools will make it work in >> 2.6.3 without inadvertently breaking it for 2.6.2, 2.6.1, and 2.6.0, right? >> Have you tried the fix in those older versions to be sure? >> >> If, as I hope, the answer to that is "yes", then I strongly support >> releasing a fixed setuptools instead of reverting the change to Python. > > Yes it does. > > The fix makes sure build_ext.get_ext_filename still works as it is supposed > (just returning the extension of a filename depending on the > environment) under all versions, I don't think this is factually correct. I assume you talk about distribute change e07e5309cd2a, right? While that change arranges to always return a result when called with an unqualified module name, it doesn't do the additional computation that setuptools does in that case, which may give something different in case the extension is a Library or in case _links_to_dynamic is true. So I would rather expect that distribute is now broken in these cases (which are seemingly rare, though). > It's two lines in Setuptools. But that change may be incorrect. Regards, Martin
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4