[reportlab-users] ReportLab 2.2 deployment options

[Andy Robinson]

2008/9/2 Stephan Richter <srichter at cosmos.phy.tufts.edu>:

> On Monday 01 September 2008, Andy Robinson wrote:

>> Q1. How badly do people want setuptools, eggs, easy_install and so on?

>> Is plain old distutils good enough?

>

> Very bad. In our big Zope 3 packages test suite, I have to deactivate z3c.rml

> tests, because of a lack of a proper ReportLab package.


Is setuptools now a "de facto standard" in the Zope 3 world?


>> Q2. Should we try to do "batteries included", with the accelerator,

>> optional C libraries for rendering bitmaps and the type 1 fonts

>> included in the basic package and one setup script to build it all?

>

> setuptools supports extra-includes, where you can specify additional

> dependencies on extended functionality.


OK, I see that, but it's not the important question.  What matters most
now is how many people actually want a package without the C extensions.
I suspect this will be a small number (doing Jython, AppEngine,
Obscurix-1982-with-dodgy-C-compilers etc) and
we can probably handle them with a short paragraph on the web site
and readme saying "it's OK to delete the following...." - or a separate
"python-only" distro if enough ask for it.

-- 
Andy