Hi, Tanguy LE CARROUR <tan...@bioneland.org> skribis:
> Quoting Ludovic Courtès (2024-03-26 17:04:52) [...] >> But then I mean, we could offer, say, ‘guix import upstream https://…’, >> and that thing could parse ‘setup.py’ or similar to produce a package >> definition from that. > > I’m not against a good-old-generic-solution®, but this one might be > a bit… too generic. It contains no mention to Python, so the next logical step > would be `guix import URL`. Not that I would not like it, though! 😁 Well, this has been on my mind for a long time. Such a tool could provide at least a useful package skeleton even for software using CMake or Autotools. > So I would say… let’s wait and see what the others think. In the > meantime, I’ll have to dive deeper in the PEP and the actual importer > code. Looks like consensus among you Pythonistas has yet to be reached regarding whether ‘pyproject.toml’ data would be a useful addition. :-) We’ll see! Ludo’. PS: I hear more and more long-time Python developers dismayed by the sad state of packaging and code evolution in Python. In Guile land, we say: refugees welcome! Come discover a great language and a great community (together with their own set of problems).
