Update "project" to mention pyproject.toml, not just setuptools #755
Conversation
Also, add the pyproject.toml and setup.cfg markers as other possible "marker" files for a "practical way to define projects".
| using either :pep:`518` ``build-system``, :ref:`distutils` or | ||
| :ref:`setuptools`, another practical way to define projects currently |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd also swap distutils/setuptools to keep have list in the order of priority:
| using either :pep:`518` ``build-system``, :ref:`distutils` or | |
| :ref:`setuptools`, another practical way to define projects currently | |
| using either :pep:`518` ``build-system``, :ref:`setuptools` or | |
| :ref:`distutils`, another practical way to define projects currently |
|
I'm not sure who should do the final approval/merge. |
| using either :pep:`518` ``build-system``, :ref:`distutils` or | ||
| :ref:`setuptools`, another practical way to define projects currently | ||
| is something that contains a :term:`pyproject.toml`, :term:`setup.py`, | ||
| or :term:`setup.cfg` file at the root of the project source directory. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it valid to have setup.cfg without setup.py? That seems like an unrelated change, even if it is true. Maybe we should stick to just adding pyproject.toml?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@pfmoore it is valid to have setup.cfg w/o setup.py if you have a modern enough setuptools version. Like in case with setuptools mentioned as a build dep in pyproject.toml.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK, but in that case you need a pyproject.toml, so it seems a bit redundant. No big deal, though.
|
@encukou I don't have merge powers in this repo so it's not up to me. |
4 participants
Also, add the pyproject.toml and setup.cfg markers as other possible "marker" files for a "practical way to define projects".
The project entry is currently outdated. Here's my suggestion for updating it.
(Is a PR is the right way to suggest the change, or should I discuss on Discourse first?)