build: include .removed file in setup.py build

[amurzeau]

This file is required by tests when executing them with the build dir as it is done in Debian (as tests might require native .so files to be compiled for some python packages for example).

[mkbloke]

#3644 ?

[bastimeyer]

This should already be covered by #3644, which added the file to MANIFEST.in. Hence the 2.1.1 release.

• https://docs.python.org/3/distutils/sourcedist.html#manifest
• https://docs.python.org/3/distutils/setupscript.html#distutils-installing-package-data

Changed in version 3.1: All the files that match package_data will be added to the MANIFEST file if no template is provided. See Specifying the files to distribute.

[amurzeau]

MANIFEST.in seems to only affect sdist, but not build, I've done this becausse even with the 2.1.1 release, I get test errors (because tests are executed against streamlink files in the build directory).

[amurzeau]

When doing python3 setup.py build, .removed is not copied to build/lib/streamlink/plugins/.removed unless adding the line in setup.py.

[bastimeyer]

When doing python3 setup.py build, .removed is not copied to build/lib/streamlink/plugins/.removed unless adding the line in setup.py.

Hm, indeed, interesting...

Could you please also remove the entry from MANIFEST.in then, so that it's not specified twice?

[bastimeyer]

Btw, not sure what makes more sense here, semantically speaking, package_data={"streamlink": ["plugins/.removed"]} or package_data={"streamlink.plugins": [".removed"]}, but I guess it doesn't really matter...

[amurzeau]

I'm not 100% sure package_data will affect sdist as MANIFEST.in does, as as you, when I revert both MANIFEST.in and setup.py changes, I still get the .removed file in the sdist archive ... (I don't know why too).

Just found this: https://stackoverflow.com/a/14159430
It seems that package_data does not affect sdist, so the MANIFEST.in change is still required.

[amurzeau]

The first comment of this stackoverflow answer says:

I have been researching this issue for the past hour and have been trying many approaches. As you say, package_data works for bdist and not sdist. However, MANIFEST.in works for sdist, but not for bdist! Therefore, the best I have been able to come up with is to include both package_data and MANIFEST.in in order to accommodate both bdist and sdist. – Wesley Baugh Mar 5 '13 at 0:41

[bastimeyer]

Well, I guess it doesn't hurt leaving it in there. The file gets included on my system when I remove it from MANIFEST.in and keep the setup.py changes, but that's probably due to the "mysterious circumstances" which I described in #3644.

I was just wondering because of what I quoted above:
#3653 (comment)

This answer from stackoverflow kind of nails it:

Seriously, I feel like this ticket is a group therapy session for folks using setuptools and discovering just what a horrid place they have found themselves in life.

---

I won't merge this just yet, in case someone else has something to say.

You don't need another patch release after this, do you?

[amurzeau]

No I don't need another patch release :-) I have this PR as a patch for this one, this is fine as-is. Merging this will let me remove it later when there will be a new release, keeping the distribution patches as low as possible, but this is not urgent.

[gravyboat]

I'm fine with this. The reasoning for it is sound as dumb as it is to have to include it. I'll leave this open just in case someone else comes along, otherwise I'll merge in a day or two.