Re: [Pyode-user] Towards an official release...

[Matthias B. <ba...@ir...>]

Timothy Stranex wrote:
> From a purely aesthetic (unix-biased) viewpoint, I think it looks better
> without the .TXT; but, if it makes it easier on the Windows guys I don't
> have any problem with adding it.

As the files were already there without the suffix I left it that way 
and removed the suffices from the license files instead before checking 
them in.

> At the moment, setup.py creates source distributions with the following
> files: ode.c, setup.py, README and the xode directory. The problem with
> this is that when run from a source distribution, setup.py tries to
> create a new ode.c from non-existing pyrex sources.
> 
> If we don't want to require our users to install pyrex then setup.py
> must be modified so that it if pyrex sources are not included, it uses
> the existing ode.c.

I added the file Manifest.in which tells the distutils what (additional) 
files to add to the source distribution. Now the Pyrex sources are also 
included (and the examples and test directories).

Additionally, I modified the setup script so that Pyrex is only called 
when the *.pyx files are newer than ode.c. This means, anybody who grabs 
the source archive and just builds the sources without modifying the 
*.pyx files won't need Pyrex.


By the way, when I updated the setup script I noticed that there's the 
"author_email" parameter which, I believe, is required once the package 
is added to the Python Package Index (PyPI, http://www.python.org/pypi).
In that case, I'd vote for Timothy as our "PyODE representative" as he's 
also running the web site.
Timothy, would you agree with that? (i.e. that your email appears in the 
"author_email" field? And if so, which one? (I just noticed that in your 
posting you were using a different email address than the one on your 
web site))

- Matthias -