Éric Araujo <mer...@netwok.org> added the comment: > [...] so I keep this command name as 'develop' and the simple usage > of this command is : > pysetup run develop So far, so good.
> BTW, most developers in this list have agreed that 'develop' is a > kind of install command, so I also add an entry funtion > 'install_editable' for it, That can be useful. On the other hand, pip uses subprocesses instead of calling Python functions, to make sure an error in the called code does not stop pip. I still think it’s a nice function to have. The name should be changed: “editable” is not used in our current terminology, so install_develop would be IMO better. I also think that “pysetup install --develop path/to/project” would be a nice high-level way to use develop, in the future. About supporting setup.py develop: I think too that it is not needed. Supporting setup.py install is a needed feature for *users*, as Alexis said; conversely, having a packaging-only develop feature can help seduce *developers* to use the new standards and tools. My vote is for removing setup.py develop support. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue8668> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
