[IPython-dev] Twisted 8...
Glenn H Tarbox, PhD
Tue Apr 1 21:11:04 CDT 2008
I don't fully understand all the issues with setuptools and the variants
other than there is a substantial debate. I've seen threads and IRC
traffic on this on the twisted channels and elsewhere so I know there
However, I've been running trunk Twisted for a while... 8.0 did bring a
number of fixes but the rather dramatic jump in numbering is almost
entirely about changing the version numbering scheme itself (the 8 is
for 2008), not a rearchitecture.
By the time code makes it to the trunk on Twisted, its pretty solid.
I've had no trouble and given the number of tests and buildbots (I host
4), I'd be surprised if we found significant issues.
On linux the installation is trivial and solid... can't speak to the
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 01:26 +0200, Gael Varoquaux wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 04:11:52PM -0700, Barry Wark wrote:
> > Just to play devil's advocate, it's not our fault that linux distros
> > lag behind in their packaged version of Twisted ;)
> How old is the twisted 8.0 release? I have the feeling it is only a
> couple of weeks old. In this case you can't call not packaging in a
> stable release lagging behind, but simply normal procedure of validating
> before shipping. Do you run mission-critical servers? Do you know what it
> means to have a lab stopped from working if their is a flaw on the
> packages you supported on one of your servers. I can tell you, it feels
> very bad. So supporting leading edge is great when you are dealing with
> your own box, and you are a devlopper happy to play around, but elsewhere
> more conservative decisions can also make sense.
> > On the more practical side, why not use Python's pacakge system (i.e.
> > setuptools) to install Twisted (I'd guess that all linux distros that
> > would include ipython would also have setuptools packages)?
> Because it s not Python's package system. It is a hack to work around the
> fact that Python has no package system. It induces a crazy amount of side
> effect and misbehaviors. Don't get me wrong, I use setuptools a lot, and
> appreciate the fonctionnality they add, but I can hardly see them as a
> robust solution for packaging. It is funny you should mention them, AFAIK
> until this (leading edge) release, twisted itself could not be installed
> using setuptools.
> I am not sure if you have followed, but currently setuptools are a
> burning subject. IMHO Python packaging is a burning subject, and I am
> tired of loosing a ridiculous amount of time to deal with different
> version of libraries. I am afraid there is no good solution. Provide
> several almost good solutions is a good idea, and setuptools do figure
> amongst these, but I must admit I wouldn't force people to rely on
> setuptools. I bites back.
> > using a setuptools-compatible Twisted might allow the ipython1
> > installer to install (maybe even precompiled) Twisted eggs if Twisted
> > isn't present. Just a thought.
> This kind of reasonning has brought setuptools to what it is currently:
> something very problematic on secure and high-reliability servers. Indeed
> you seem to be suggesting that the installer will be doing some magic to
> download the requirements if they are not their. Think about it, this is
> both a unacceptable security hole, and something that forbids any kind of
> alternate packaging (for instance for automated deployement on a
> I am just trying to warn people that setuptools is a neat toy, but not a
> solution for everybody. I use it a lot on my development boxes, but never
> on my servers.
> My 2 cents,
> IPython-dev mailing list
Glenn H. Tarbox, PhD | Don’t worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas
206-494-0819 | are any good, you’ll have to ram them down people’s throats
email@example.com (gtalk) + ghtdak on aim/freenode | ^ Howard Aiken, IBM engineer
More information about the IPython-dev