On 16 November 2017 at 22:33, Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@redhat.com> wrote:

Adding the link makes sense to me. Adding all the macros definition to the wiki does not make sense to me, but form different reasons. I think that having %py3_build_egg and %py3_install_egg there is just not necessary. Since there are more files at [0] I'd just add that link.

[0] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-rpm-macros/tree/master

Even though it's just a new informational link, I'm guessing we still need to file an FPC ticket for that?

About flit:

* is this way of creating Python distributions getting more and
more popular?

It is - Thomas Kluyver (flit's creator) is actually driving a lot of work to get pip's pluggable build system support working properly.

The key differences between it and setuptools are:

1. It's designed specifically for pure Python projects

2. It assumes it can get the list of files to package from git

Those two assumptions sweep away a *lot* of the complexity in setuptools, and hence make flit far more beginner friendly.

* if so, should we add a new section of the guidelines? something like
"Packaging setup.py-less projects"?

Rather than emphasising the absence of setup.py, I'd emphasise the use of wheel files:

* "Defining an RPM based on a wheel build process"

* "Defining an RPM based on a setup.py file"

The latter would just be a renamed https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Example_common_spec_file - that is the setup.py based build process, but it isn't currently obvious that `pyX_build` and `pyX_install` assume the use of a setup.py file.

Cheers,

Nick.

Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia