publish wheels (ESPTOOL-1027)

[dimbleby]

build and publish wheels

[github-actions]

	Warnings
⚠️	Some issues found for the commit messages in this PR: the commit message "publish wheels": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "simplify scripts": summary looks empty type/action looks empty Please fix these commit messages - here are some basic tips: follow Conventional Commits style correct format of commit message should be: <type/action>(<scope/component>): <summary>, for example fix(esp32): Fixed startup timeout issue allowed types are: change,ci,docs,feat,fix,refactor,remove,revert,test sufficiently descriptive message summary should be between 20 to 72 characters and start with upper case letter avoid Jira references in commit messages (unavailable/irrelevant for our customers) TIP: Install pre-commit hooks and run this check when committing (uses the Conventional Precommit Linter).
⚠️	The Pull Request description looks very brief, please check if more details can be added.

👋 Hello dimbleby, we appreciate your contribution to this project!

---

📘 Please review the project's Contributions Guide for key guidelines on code, documentation, testing, and more.

---

Click to see more instructions ...

This automated output is generated by the PR linter DangerJS, which checks if your Pull Request meets the project's requirements and helps you fix potential issues.

DangerJS is triggered with each push event to a Pull Request and modify the contents of this comment.

Please consider the following:
- Danger mainly focuses on the PR structure and formatting and can't understand the meaning behind your code or changes.
- Danger is not a substitute for human code reviews; it's still important to request a code review from your colleagues.
- Resolve all warnings (⚠️ ) before requesting a review from human reviewers - they will appreciate it.
- To manually retry these Danger checks, please navigate to the Actions tab and re-run last Danger workflow.

Review and merge process you can expect ...

We do welcome contributions in the form of bug reports, feature requests and pull requests via this public GitHub repository.

This GitHub project is public mirror of our internal git repository

1. An internal issue has been created for the PR, we assign it to the relevant engineer.
2. They review the PR and either approve it or ask you for changes or clarifications.
3. Once the GitHub PR is approved, we synchronize it into our internal git repository.
4. In the internal git repository we do the final review, collect approvals from core owners and make sure all the automated tests are passing.
- At this point we may do some adjustments to the proposed change, or extend it by adding tests or documentation.
5. If the change is approved and passes the tests it is merged into the default branch.
5. On next sync from the internal git repository merged change will appear in this public GitHub repository.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 0242755

[dimbleby]

oh I see, there is quite the tangle here because script installation is oddly different on windows and linux, and doing the conventional thing seems difficult because you have your commands ending .py.

I will push a second commit on this branch that simplifies everything to look more normal, but it is a breaking change in the sense that eg the command esptool.py becomes esptool.

Mostly that is what people want! But maybe not, I dunno.

[radimkarnis]

Hello @dimbleby,

Thank you for the contribution!

This has been considered for a long time. Currently, we are keeping the esptool.py format for historical and compatibility reasons, although it causes more maintenance headaches (such as not being able to publish wheels - #1011) or keeping the setup.py quirks.

As we are currently working on a new v5 major release on master, this breaking change is being considered again. At this moment, we cannot merge this in this state - ideally, we want to keep a way to run both aliases esptool (being the default one) and esptool.py (maybe as a simple wrapper?) (cc @peterdragun).

If you feel like it, you can help to discover this possibility. Aynway, I will keep this open until we find an acceptable solution!

Thanks again.

[radimkarnis]

Also, making this switch will require more work - e.g. extensive changes in the documentation and the test suite (see the failing CI jobs above).

[dimbleby]

My interest is more generally in encouraging projects to publish wheels, and not specifically in this project. If, before I started, I had understood the hole that you have dug for yourselves here then I would likely have left this one alone!

If you have a major release coming up then I do encourage you to take the opportunity to disentangle this, likely by continuing in the direction that this pull request points. But I do not expect to contribute any further work to that effort.

[radimkarnis]

In that case, I am closing this PR. We will deal with the "hole" ourselves, thank you.