-1 The usage of "setup.py sdist" or "setup.py bdist_wheel" only happens in certain edge cases (e.g. the almost un-documented `--enable-wheels` option) and in these cases it is no problem to require developers to run `pip install build` beforehand. So these last remaining instances of calling "setup.py" directly can easily be migrated to "build", even without "build" being a standard package. Most developers should never need the "build" module (neither directly nor indirectly) and hence having it as an optional package is good-enough in my opinion.
Also I don't see how this proposal is any different than the other one that has been discussed before. On Monday, April 15, 2024 at 6:27:32 AM UTC+8 Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > On 14 April 2024 19:14:51 BST, Matthias Koeppe <matthia...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >When I completed the NumFOCUS application yesterday, I had to go through > >the past years of sage-devel posts to answer the new question "Where do > you > >host conversations about project development and governance (e.g. mailing > >lists, forums, etc.), and how many participants do you have?" (see > > > https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/NumFOCUS#q16-where-do-you-host-conversations-about-project-development-and-governance-eg-mailing-lists-forums-etc-and-how-many-participants-do-you-have > ) > > > >While doing so, I also collected the sage-devel threads in which packages > >were proposed to be added as standard packages, following our project's > >procedures: > > > This is not an answer. I would like an explanation why Sage the distro has > to grow the bloat at ever increasing speed, why you think it is > sustainable, but, most of all, why "batteries included" is meaningful in > 2024, and why these procedures must stay as they are. > > I understand that some macOS users are very comfortable with Sage the > distro playing the role of a missing macOS package manager, but it makes me > sad that I spent many months of my time debugging and improving Sage on > macOS, and getting this kind of cold shoulder in response to my requests. > > > > Dima > > >- "Add pplpy and gmpy2 as standard packages" > >(https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/qoxVng1__0A/m/4HntWHp_AQAJ, > >2018-02) > >- "Make giacpy_sage a standard package" > >(https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/uYXGzG_py28/m/4SN5hts4FQAJ, > >2020-02) > >- "Add tox as a standard package" > >(https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/G5kMggTecA8/m/2aTZSt_AAwAJ, > >2020-09) > >- "Making cmake a standard package" > >(https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/Ccumny9Yioc/m/litCsb6gAwAJ, > >2021-07) > >- "New standard package: GNU Info" > >(https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/aIx8i-0MRo4/m/4WxL64JlBAAJ, > >2021-07) > >- "Add more-itertools as a standard package" > >(https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/Dq83PiiCAsU/m/43WX3JgjDgAJ, > >2021-12) > >- "Make Jupyterlab a standard package" > >(https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/orUpb-YXIHk/m/d_zDX3xyDQAJ, > >2022-03) > >- "Make Furo a standard package" > >(https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/VTU_I-ecPlA/m/KMd9cMX9AQAJ, > >2022-08) > >- "Make ipympl a standard package" > >(https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/fRufANUCNdY/m/RKhnlUYdAgAJ, > >2023-09) > > > >Our project's procedures have not changed. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/fac4c61a-5dbf-4a4d-aa00-09cde96d8d9an%40googlegroups.com.
