On 21 May 2015 at 10:52, Wes Turner <wes.turner@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 20, 2015 7:43 PM, "Nick Coghlan" <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
One of my hopes for the metadata extension system in PEP 426 is that we'll be able to define extensions like "fedora.repackage", "debian.repackage" or "conda.repackage" which include whatever additional info is needed to automate creation of a policy compliant downstream package in a format that's a purely additive complement to the upstream metadata, rather than being somewhat duplicative as is the case today with things like spec files, deb control files, and conda recipes.
http://conda.pydata.org/docs/bdist_conda.html bdist_conda?
conda has the benefit of *not* renaming Python packages in convoluted ways that interfere with automated identification of dependencies :) Both conda and Linux distros run into the "it's difficult/impossible to describe external binary dependencies in a cross-platform way" problem, though. While https://www.biicode.com/ is interesting in the context of CMake based projects, that still excludes a lot of software. (RYPPL is another I'd heard of, but it's GitHub repo hasn't seen much activity since 2013, and ryppl.org appears to be entirely dead) Regards, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia