You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Overall, flit is older, poetry is newer, and poetry also functions as a dependency manager. Hence I would lean towards poetry at this stage. Both help with pypi distribution, but can’t help with conda distribution. That said, I currently don’t see why it would be incompatible with conda distribution (via another means, namely the conda upload instructions in #142).
do they handle building wheels with compiled code?
According to the site, “Flit doesn’t support advanced packages like those creating C extensions”. From my brief google searching, I couldn’t find any hits for flit supporting C extensions (which I’m assuming is what is meant by “compiled code”).
Poetry seems to support it as indicated by python-poetry/poetry#11. See sdispater’s response for a working example:
Yes, it works even though it's not currently documented because I do not know if it will stay this way since it relies on adding kwargs to the setup.py.
Anyway, it you want to test this, you have to specifiy a build script in your pyproject.toml:
[tool.poetry]
build = 'build.py'
that will define a build function that will add the necessary build keyword arguments to the call to setup() in the generated setup.py.
-sdispater
do they play well with conda?
They won’t help upload the project to conda, but we might and should be able to follow the conda instructions in #142 without flit or poetry interfering.
Original report by GavinH (Bitbucket: 557058:e40c23e1-e273-4527-a2f8-5de5876e870d, ).
Should we use flit, poetry or neither?
These tools simplify project distribution to pypi. The questions are:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: