Consider using setuptools-scm

[c24t]

@a-feld has a slick versioning solution that uses setuptools-scm to set the version from git tags.

We should consider doing the same thing here to avoid updating version files by hand. Note that this doesn't mean that we have to release in response to git tags.

This approach also suggests that we should release all packages in the repo with the same version number on each release, or split these packages into separate. This decision TBD.

[toumorokoshi]

In an effort to start simplifying our development and publishing story, I'll take this one up.

Here's my current proposal:

1. move all packages to use setuptools_scm (this seems fairly trivial)
2. migrate as much information from setup.py into setup.cfg as possible (all extensions have setup.cfgs, the api and sdk package do not).
3. tag a new version 0.4dev0 to ensure that package versions match current expectations.

Alternative to #3 is to up the minor version to 0.5. In general, when moving packaging and versioning schemes this is a good practice, as it avoids potential collisions.

[toumorokoshi]

unfortunately setuptools-scm is not working well due to it's reliance on information that is only available in the actual source repo: pypa/setuptools-scm#357

[Oberon00]

I think it is able to cope with the zipped source package too, by generating meta-information into it. The only thing that I can think of that would break is, is copying the source manually without the .git folder. I never tried it myself though.

[toumorokoshi]

removing from 0.4 as the integration is not as straightforward, and requires changes to setuptools_scm or to our repository hierarchy.

[toumorokoshi]

looks like pip has changed their behavior! https://github.com/pypa/pip/pull/7882/files. So we may be able to use setuptools_scm now!!

[codeboten]

No plans on doing this in the near future. Closing