-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29
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
Stop using the deprecated distutils #56
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Stop using the deprecated distutils #56
Conversation
Am I correct that this will break users who attempt to install from .tar.gz but who don't have setuptools installed, but only their system's standard Python? |
Yes, correct. Actually we could move most of the content of the current |
3979de6
to
9737465
Compare
9737465
to
f4ebc5d
Compare
Yes, but on the other side, under python 3.12 (to be released 2023-10-02) the build will fail with |
I've been pondering this week whether to add a And yet — If the next install fails for someone, would they really go create a GitHub account and go through the work of figuring out how to create an issue? Or would they just install the previous version of jplephem instead, assuming they could figure out the magic incantation to do that (and assuming they could figure out what the previous version had been)? Or would they give up entirely? The problem with breaking things for users is that it can be traumatic for the user while never signalling the developer that something is wrong. I'm likely to take the first option: a |
Hi @brandon-rhodes, sorry, I have probably misunderstood your first comment.
Regarding the scenario in which The only scenario which is not covered is the one in which the user runs the
For this case, using the By the way I would strongly recommend to deprecate the direct invocation of the |
ff30c65
to
66285ee
Compare
Use setuptools instead.