[Distutils] RFC PEP 386 : Version comparisons
jim at zope.com
Fri Jul 3 14:39:07 CEST 2009
On Jul 3, 2009, at 8:20 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> back to that discussion, after re-reading all the threads I have a
> proposal :
> 1- let's add as we said "install_requires" in PEP 345 and describe in
> it that people can define requirements,
> but without giving them rules for the version schemes.
> We will just write in that PEP that it's up to the *dependency
> manager* (pip, setuptools, zc.buildout, etc)
> to provide a cmp() for the version.
> The only rule will be that each dependency is described like this :
> dist_name [<|>|==|!=|>=|<=] version
> where version is free and dist_name in [a-zA-Z0-9]
Your restriction on dist/project name is too tight. Unfortunately, I
don't think there are currently restrictions on project names, but
that's a different battle. :) I think there was some discussion
recently about not allowing spaces in project names. Maybe we could
get away with disallowing spaces in project names in install_requires.
> 2- let's drop PEP 386 completely
> 3- I'll start a separate, standalone project that contains the less
> controversial form of verlib.py, (the one that doesn't contains the
> post-dev stuff)
> so we won't lose the work we all did in that.
> Any thoughts ?
Big +1. :)
Getting install_requires would help me make progress on buildout for
More information about the Distutils-SIG