On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:47 AM, jan matejek jmatejek@suse.com wrote:
On 19.10.2016 02:14, Todd Rme wrote:
So for packages that don't come with their own build script, and whose wheels lack any compiled code, I think it should be allowed to use the wheel for packaging our rpms.
I'm OK with using wheels in place of source tarball, in these cases as you describe.
Somewhat ambivalent about just dropping the wheel into site-packages and leaving it at that. Fedora allows using wheels, in a way [1], but they unpack them in the %install section (via a patch to pip [2][3] that we don't have but could conceivably adopt). I think we should do the same thing, as opposed to simply installing the wheel, but i don't really have a good reason, just a gut feeling.
m.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PythonWheels [2] https://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/1351 [3] https://github.com/fedora-python/rewheel/blob/92fd4dd0f14fb007323d8032b3dc9e...
No, I definitely don't want to just drop the wheel in. My thinking was to use pip's --root and --prefix arguments just like setup.py currently supports. For packages that only install python modules and nothing else, this works fine. If it gets to the point where packages that install executables are only available as wheels, I guess we could implement that patch. But right now I am not aware of any packages that require it.