OWA-EPANET wrapper needs to be properly packaged

[samhatchett]

PRs welcome!

[samhatchett]

... see closed issues referenced above for examples of how the wrapper is not properly packaged :)

[michaeltryby]

This set of issues I raised establish a baseline for the current state of the project. Each platform handles Python extension build, linking, and resolves shared library locations at runtime slightly differently.

[samhatchett]

I guess the question is whether a baseline is even necessary given that what exists now was created to serve immediate purposes, unrelated to wide adoption and scalability [edit: in terms of packaging/distribution]. The ultimate solution is not to document all the individual shortcomings of the current setup and address each one as a separate issue.

From your comments, it looks like there's lots of great stuff over on the swmm-python project that can be readily adapted here. You have suggested doing so, and received no pushback - only clarifying questions to try and comprehend the scope of changes.

[samhatchett]

digging in a bit further... @michaeltryby it looks like you already have a (mostly?) functional wrapper set up at https://github.com/michaeltryby/epanet-python/tree/dev/epanet-toolkit

would you like to highlight the differences between what is in this repo and what you have been working on?

[michaeltryby]

@samhatchett thats the staging area for the PR I’m assembling. Give me a call if you want to talk.

[samhatchett]

that's great - looking forward to the PR