Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Meta-ticket: Clean up src/setup.py to bring it to standard setuptools behavior #21508

Closed
mkoeppe opened this issue Sep 16, 2016 · 34 comments
Closed

Comments

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Member

mkoeppe commented Sep 16, 2016

Sub-tasks:

In particular,

  • src/setup.py --help should return immediately.
  • src/setup.py clean should not build anything but just clean (and everything that is now done by make clean in the src directory should be done by it; see make sagelib a script package #29411)

Also the following should be done:

Also see:

CC: @jdemeyer @vbraun @embray @nexttime @kiwifb @williamstein @mezzarobba @dimpase @jhpalmieri

Component: build

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21508

@mkoeppe mkoeppe added this to the sage-7.5 milestone Sep 16, 2016
@jdemeyer
Copy link

Dependencies: #20596

@jdemeyer jdemeyer removed the t: bug label Sep 16, 2016
@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe mkoeppe changed the title Clean up src/setup.py Clean up src/setup.py, fix 'setup.py sdist' Sep 16, 2016
@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe mkoeppe changed the title Clean up src/setup.py, fix 'setup.py sdist' Clean up src/setup.py to bring it to standard distutils behavior Sep 17, 2016
@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@embray
Copy link
Contributor

embray commented Sep 26, 2016

comment:8

and everything that is now done by make clean should be done by it

By which you mean the makefile in src/ right?

@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Member Author

mkoeppe commented Sep 26, 2016

comment:9

Yes -- I've clarified it in the description.

@jdemeyer
Copy link

Changed dependencies from #20596 to #21600

@jdemeyer

This comment has been minimized.

@jdemeyer
Copy link

Changed dependencies from #21600 to #21604, #21600

@jdemeyer
Copy link

Changed dependencies from #21604, #21600 to #21480, #21604, #21600

@jdemeyer

This comment has been minimized.

@embray
Copy link
Contributor

embray commented Sep 29, 2016

comment:13

Definitely keep in touch with me as a point of contact on any work you do on this--I know distutils + setuptools from top to bottom.

@embray

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Member Author

mkoeppe commented Sep 29, 2016

comment:15

Let me just say that I consider #21613 not an important step towards this task ("... standard distutils behavior"). The present task ticket (#21508) is concerned with getting the behavior of setup.py standard (how does it respond to standard commands and options), not necessarily its implementation. The fact that setup.py with #21480 invokes make is an implementation detail, which is not very relevant for the goal of #21507.

@embray
Copy link
Contributor

embray commented Sep 30, 2016

comment:16

Except it is pretty non-standard for it to have non-trivial side-effects (e.g. running a subprocess that generates files) unconditionally. Behavior-wise that should only happen when it's actually important for that to happen, such as during the build command.

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Member Author

mkoeppe commented Sep 30, 2016

comment:17

Replying to @embray:

Except it is pretty non-standard for it to have non-trivial side-effects (e.g. running a subprocess that generates files) unconditionally. Behavior-wise that should only happen when it's actually important for that to happen, such as during the build command.

I agree that it should happen during the build command.

@embray
Copy link
Contributor

embray commented Oct 4, 2016

comment:18

I will work on #21613, and you'll see it's not that big a deal.

@jdemeyer
Copy link

jdemeyer commented Oct 4, 2016

comment:19

Replying to @embray:

I will work on #21613, and you'll see it's not that big a deal.

Beware of conflicts with other tickets, in particular #21600 and its dependencies.

@embray
Copy link
Contributor

embray commented Oct 4, 2016

comment:20

Yep. I don't think there will be significant conflicts, but I can make those tickets dependencies of #21613 and ensure any work I do there integrates well with the others before suggesting it to be merged.

@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-7.5, sage-9.2 May 1, 2020
@mkoeppe mkoeppe changed the title Clean up src/setup.py to bring it to standard distutils behavior Meta-ticket: Clean up src/setup.py to bring it to standard distutils behavior May 1, 2020
@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@dimpase

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Member Author

mkoeppe commented May 17, 2020

Changed dependencies from #21480, #21604, #21600 to none

@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe mkoeppe changed the title Meta-ticket: Clean up src/setup.py to bring it to standard distutils behavior Meta-ticket: Clean up src/setup.py to bring it to standard setuptools behavior Jun 4, 2020
@mkoeppe

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.2, sage-9.3 Oct 24, 2020
@mkoeppe
Copy link
Member Author

mkoeppe commented Mar 24, 2021

comment:35

Sage development has entered the release candidate phase for 9.3. Setting a new milestone for this ticket based on a cursory review of ticket status, priority, and last modification date.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants