➜
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on 2011-10-19 20:05 by eric.araujo, last changed 2022-04-11 14:57 by admin. This issue is now closed.
| Messages (3) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg145950 - (view) | Author: Éric Araujo (eric.araujo) *  |
Date: 2011-10-19 20:05 | |
As discussed in #11637, failing hooks should not stop operation. I see different issues: a) a hook is not found b) a hook is not callable c) a hook raises an exception Current code will raise a Packaging exception for a) and b), and let the exception propagate in case of c). I have a patch that makes Packaging ignore all three kinds and issue warning or error logging messages. An option (--strict) would be needed to switch from logging messages to exceptions; I wonder if an elegant way to do that would be a custom logging handler. |
|||
| msg145957 - (view) | Author: Vinay Sajip (vinay.sajip) * |
Date: 2011-10-19 20:40 | |
> An option (--strict) would be needed to switch from logging messages to > exceptions; I wonder if an elegant way to do that would be a custom logging > handler. I'm not sure a custom logging handler is the way to go. I think it would be better to log the exception condition in all cases, raising it if --strict is specified, and swallowing it otherwise. An application developer can configure loggers/handlers appropriately if they want. |
|||
| msg213341 - (view) | Author: Éric Araujo (eric.araujo) * |
Date: 2014-03-13 00:38 | |
Out of date for distutils2, may be considered for metadata 2.0 hooks. |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022-04-11 14:57:22 | admin | set | github: 57434 |
| 2014-03-13 00:38:30 | eric.araujo | set | status: open -> closed nosy: + ncoghlan messages: + msg213341 resolution: out of date stage: resolved |
| 2011-10-19 20:40:16 | vinay.sajip | set | messages: + msg145957 |
| 2011-10-19 20:05:36 | eric.araujo | create | |