Yes, but the METADATA version of the metadata is not a standard.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Donald Stufft
On Feb 27, 2014, at 9:13 AM, Daniel Holth
wrote: I don't think it matters which number we use in the METADATA key/value metadata... it's not even checked by anything.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 7:16 AM, Nick Coghlan
wrote: On 27 February 2014 18:16, Vinay Sajip
wrote: but my question was what are you adding, if anything, that warranted it having "Metadata-Version: 2.0"?
I believe that the fields 'Private-Version', 'Obsoleted-By', 'Setup-Requires-Dist', 'Extension' and 'Provides-Extra' were added on top of the 1.2 metadata in an early version of PEP 426, before the move to JSON.
For the record, http://hg.python.org/peps/file/3b67372b39ba/pep-0426.txt is the last version prior to the switch to JSON, and the summary of differences is at http://hg.python.org/peps/file/3b67372b39ba/pep-0426.txt#l1263
At that time, I think wheel still had a dependency on PEP 426 - changing wheels to work with the setuptools metadata was a relatively late change after we realised it made sense to decouple the two activities.
Cheers, Nick.
-- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Compliance to standards matter. It's how you get reasonable interoperability.
----------------- Donald Stufft PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA