dulwich-users team mailing list archive

[Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 14:32 -0700, David Borowitz wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 13:31, Augie Fackler <durin42@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>         
>         On May 26, 2010, at 11:48 AM, David Borowitz wrote:
>         
>                 I'm definitely open to the idea of simplifying and/or
>                 combining dul-daemon
>                 and dul-web. To be honest, it feels a little messy
>                 every time I have to add
>                 more code to one of those scripts. In my ideal world,
>                 these wrapper scripts
>                 would contain as little code as possible (basically
>                 "if __name__ ==
>                 '__main__': start_server('http', sys.argv[1:])").
>                 
>                 Another possibility that moves in a slightly different
>                 direction is to use
>                 setuptools's entry points:
>                 http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/setuptools#automatic-script-creation
>                 
>                 <http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/setuptools#automatic-script-creation>(Tangentially,
>                 the reason I added the logging code to dul-web was
>                 that I didn't want to put
>                 the WSGI handlers in web.py, since wsgiref is not part
>                 of the python2.4
>                 standard library. That said, every python2.4 system I
>                 have has wsgiref
>                 installed, and I'm sure we could come up with a
>                 conditional import scheme
>                 that fails gracefully.)
>         
>         
>         I'd be a _huge_ fan of using entry points instead of
>         maintaining scripts - manually maintained scripts are often a
>         colossal pain when using something like virtualenv or
>         buildout.
> 
> 
> I agree, that's why I suggested it :)

> The only downside as far as I can see is that it introduces a
> dependency on setuptools, but pretty much everyone has setuptools
> anyway (don't they?). Maybe it's possible to do something equivalent
> with distutils but I don't know how.
FWIW I didn't have setuptools installed until I received a patch for
Dulwich that added support for it to setup.py. 

Is there any particular benefit in using entry points rather than using
a trivial stub script that does "from dulwich.server import
start_server; start_server(sys.argv[1:])" ?

Cheers,

Jelmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part