Mercurial extension - first attempt

[Marcin Kasperski]

I wrote first version of keyring-backed mercurial extension:

http://bitbucket.org/Mekk/mercurial_keyring/

Not much testing yet, but it is self-feeding (I push the code to
bitbucket using keyring-saved password).

Once more thank you for the very useful library.

[Tarek Ziadé]

that's great ! I'll use it. Are you planning to release it soon ?

Tarek

--
Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org | オープンソースはすごい! | 开源传万世，因有你参与

[Marcin Kasperski]

> that's great ! I'll use it. Are you planning to release it soon ?

Well, I published it on bitbucket, and wrote
http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/KeyringExtension
Not sure what else should I do to release it

PS I considered making an egg but after reviewing a couple of other
extensions it does not seem people tend to distribute other extensions
this way - and there is a reason, easy_install won't be able to put
them into hgext/, and if it installs it normally, the path to the file
is rather ugly, so it turns out easier to just download .py and save
it in preferable place

[Tarek Ziadé]

On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Marcin Kasperski
<Marcin.K...@mekk.waw.pl> wrote:
>> that's great ! I'll use it. Are you planning to release it soon ?
>
> Well, I published it on bitbucket, and wrote
> http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/KeyringExtension
> Not sure what else should I do to release it
>

If it has a setup.py, PyPI would be a great place

> PS I considered making an egg but after reviewing a couple of other
> extensions it does not seem people tend to distribute other extensions
> this way - and there is a reason, easy_install won't be able to put
> them into hgext/, and if it installs it normally, the path to the file
> is rather ugly, so it turns out easier to just download .py and save
> it in preferable place

I saw that you have removed setup.py yes. I remembered having the same problem
with one of my extension.

There's a hack to make it work (didn't try it yet though):
define your .py file as a data file in setup.py and point the hgext
directory to install it to it.

But can't you create a package, let's say "foo", and point in .hgrc
your extensions
as "foo.keyring" ? (if "keyring.py" is the module)

or Mercurial just won't read anything else than the hgext. namespace ?

Cheers
Tarek

[Marcin Kasperski]

> But can't you create a package, let's say "foo", and point in .hgrc
> your extensions
> as "foo.keyring" ? (if "keyring.py" is the module)
>
> or Mercurial just won't read anything else than the hgext. namespace ?

I don't know at the moment, maybe will test it later. But my main
rationale is that I checked a couple of other extensions, including
those written by established mercurial community members, and none of
them had setup.py or egg. Considering this is my first attempt to
write mercurial extension, I think I will stay consistent ;-)

(at the same time, it could be a good idea to discuss the problem on
mercurial devel mailing list, I will consider it)

[Tarek Ziadé]

On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Marcin Kasperski
<Marcin.K...@mekk.waw.pl> wrote:
>> But can't you create a package, let's say "foo", and point in .hgrc
>> your extensions
>> as "foo.keyring" ? (if "keyring.py" is the module)
>>
>> or Mercurial just won't read anything else than the hgext. namespace ?
>
> I don't know at the moment, maybe will test it later. But my main
> rationale is that I checked a couple of other extensions, including
> those written by established mercurial community members, and none of
> them had setup.py or egg.

Ok

Notice that's not related to egg, but just to the standard way of
distributing a python
project using Distutils.

> Considering this is my first attempt to
> write mercurial extension, I think I will stay consistent ;-)

How do they distribute it to the community ?

end user have to manually copy the .py file to the hgext package ?

Cheers,
Tarek

[Marcin Kasperski]

> How do they distribute it to the community ?
>
> end user have to manually copy the .py file to the hgext package ?

No. end user is to save .py file anywhere he or she likes, then write

[extensions]
hgext.extension_name = /full/path/to/the/extension/file.py

in ~/.hgrc

Later on, if the extension turns out to be popular, it is adopted by
official distribution (here it is beneficial to have it as a single
file, easier to copy ;-))

AFAIK people tend to use dirs like ~/.hgext for extensions. And it is
easier to write
hgext.mercurial_keyring = ~/.hgext/mercurial_keyring.py
than to write
hgext.mercurial_keyring =
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/mercurial_keyring-0.1-py2.6-linux-x86_64.egg/mercurial_keyring.py
or sth similar ;-)

[Tarek Ziadé]

On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Marcin Kasperski
<Marcin.K...@mekk.waw.pl> wrote:
[..]

>
> AFAIK people tend to use dirs like ~/.hgext for extensions. And it is
> easier to write
>   hgext.mercurial_keyring = ~/.hgext/mercurial_keyring.py
> than to write
>   hgext.mercurial_keyring =
> /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/mercurial_keyring-0.1-py2.6-linux-x86_64.egg/mercurial_keyring.py
> or sth similar ;-)

I wasn't thinking about that, but about a very simple way to point a
module extension:
package.module.

So in your hgrc:

[extensions]
hgext.mercurial_keyring = my_package.my_extension

Then Mercurial can import it, as easily as it would for a filename.

I'll send a proposal at mercurial-dev.

Tarek

[Tarek Ziadé]

On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Tarek Ziadé <ziade...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Marcin Kasperski
> <Marcin.K...@mekk.waw.pl> wrote:
> [..]
>>
>> AFAIK people tend to use dirs like ~/.hgext for extensions. And it is
>> easier to write
>>   hgext.mercurial_keyring = ~/.hgext/mercurial_keyring.py
>> than to write
>>   hgext.mercurial_keyring =
>> /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/mercurial_keyring-0.1-py2.6-linux-x86_64.egg/mercurial_keyring.py
>> or sth similar ;-)
>

I've looked at the mercurial code. You can definitely use a module name.

So, let's say, you install your single module called
"mercurial_keyring.py" in Python under site-packages, just write:

mercurial_keyring =

And Mercurial will try to import that module directly.

Meaning that you can safely provide your extension as a distutils package.


Cheers
Tarek

[Marcin Kasperski]

> I've looked at the mercurial code. You can definitely use a module name.
>
> So, let's say, you install your single module called
> "mercurial_keyring.py" in Python under site-packages, just write:
>
>   mercurial_keyring =
>
> And Mercurial will try to import that module directly.

OK, I did that and registered the package on pypi. You can now

easy_install mercurial_keyring

and configure it as above.

Changes pushed also to https://Me...@bitbucket.org/Mekk/mercurial_keyring/

[Tarek Ziadé]

Great ! Thanks,


On Dec 6, 8:09 pm, Marcin Kasperski <Marcin.Kasper...@mekk.waw.pl>
wrote:

> Changes pushed also to https://M...@bitbucket.org/Mekk/mercurial_keyring/