On 27 September 2015 at 18:05, Thomas Güttler
In practice, the sample project is not expected to be treated as definitive, so I don't think it matters that much if people use a different name.
OK, the sample project is not the definitive guide line. Where can I find the definitive guide line?
I think you're misunderstanding what I meant by "definitive". It's a guideline, yes. But guidelines aren't definitive (by definition) - they are for guidance, and people can use something different if they prefer. The nearest you'll find to a "definitive" answer is in the packaging user guide, which says to supply a README.rst, and a long_description argument to setup.py. It doesn't say whether the two should be required to have the same content (IMO, they shouldn't) or how you supply the data for the long_description argument. The sample project (referred to from packaging.python.org) chooses to implement long_description by reading it from a file called DESCRIPTION.rst, because that's what seemed convenient to me when I wrote it. But you're welcome to do something different if you prefer - and if you do so you'll still be in line with the guidelines in the packaging user guide (if conforming to those guidelines matters to you).
Paul, please tell me your choice: README.rst or DESCRIPTION.rst. Which one do you prefer to be used in setup.py of the example project?
I preferred DESCRIPTION.rst. That's why I created it with that name :-) Mainly because I don't believe that a project README and the package's long_description are necessarily the same thing. Now, I mostly don't care. Paul