Re: [Distutils] RFC : PEP 376 - egg.info
At 05:23 PM 5/4/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
There's another point I was thinking about in PEP 376
What about dropping the 'egg' part in 'PROJECT.egg-info' ? and replace it with
'PROJECT.info'
(and make the 2.7 version compatible with PROJECT.egg-info )
I know it's a minor change,
Actually, it's a major change, since it means dropping backward compatibility with existing tools.
2009/5/4 P.J. Eby <pje@telecommunity.com>:
At 05:23 PM 5/4/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
There's another point I was thinking about in PEP 376
What about dropping the 'egg' part in 'PROJECT.egg-info' ? and replace it with
'PROJECT.info'
(and make the 2.7 version compatible with PROJECT.egg-info )
I know it's a minor change,
Actually, it's a major change, since it means dropping backward compatibility with existing tools.
well if Distutils 2.7 / 3.1 keeps backward compatibility like I said, that would give 3 years for existing tools to change.. But what about the idea ? Regards Tarek -- Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 05:54:59PM +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
2009/5/4 P.J. Eby <pje@telecommunity.com>:
At 05:23 PM 5/4/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
There's another point I was thinking about in PEP 376
What about dropping the 'egg' part in 'PROJECT.egg-info' ? and replace it with
'PROJECT.info'
(and make the 2.7 version compatible with PROJECT.egg-info )
I know it's a minor change,
Actually, it's a major change, since it means dropping backward compatibility with existing tools.
well if Distutils 2.7 / 3.1 keeps backward compatibility like I said, that would give 3 years for existing tools to change..
But what about the idea ?
How can we be sure that we won't want to change it again in the future? As for PROJECT.info, that still doesn't say that the .info directory describes a project to me. Not that I like .egg-info, but I guess PJE's argument that it is a major change is valid and just .info isn't quite better enough for me to justify the pain (i.e. the name doesn't sound so right that no one will ever want to change it again). Regards Floris -- Debian GNU/Linux -- The Power of Freedom www.debian.org | www.gnu.org | www.kernel.org
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 6:12 PM, Floris Bruynooghe <floris.bruynooghe@gmail.com> wrote:
But what about the idea ?
How can we be sure that we won't want to change it again in the future?
well I think it's now or never, since we are defining a standard here for this directory.
As for PROJECT.info, that still doesn't say that the .info directory describes a project to me. Not that I like .egg-info, but I guess PJE's argument that it is a major change is valid and just .info isn't quite better enough for me to justify the pain (i.e. the name doesn't sound so right that no one will ever want to change it again).
Ok then, we will have to provide extra documentation to make people understand that the '.egg-info' directory has absolutely nothing to do with egg-the-format but is rather a metadata container. 'egg-info' was introduced with adding the whole 'egg' thing in Python in mind at some point I believe. And it seems that the .egg directory/zip file for projects setuptools provides will not make it into Python and is still very controversial (http://www.reddit.com/r/Python/comments/8he79/am_i_alone_in_feeling_like_pyt...) So removing the 'egg' part of 'egg-info' seemed natural to me at this point. Regards Tarek -- Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 6:12 PM, Floris Bruynooghe <floris.bruynooghe@gmail.com> wrote:
Ok then, we will have to provide extra documentation to make people understand that the '.egg-info' directory has absolutely nothing to do with egg-the-format but is rather a metadata container.
So removing the 'egg' part of 'egg-info' seemed natural to me at this point.
That seems reasonable to me. Just name it something a little more verbose, like pkg-info or metadata or whatever it actually is that it contains. And since this is such a wonderful bikeshed opportunity, I'd suggest you just pick whatever concept-neutral name you personally like the best ;) Hanno
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 7:42 PM, Hanno Schlichting <hannosch@hannosch.eu> wrote:
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 6:12 PM, Floris Bruynooghe <floris.bruynooghe@gmail.com> wrote:
Ok then, we will have to provide extra documentation to make people understand that the '.egg-info' directory has absolutely nothing to do with egg-the-format but is rather a metadata container.
So removing the 'egg' part of 'egg-info' seemed natural to me at this point.
That seems reasonable to me. Just name it something a little more verbose, like pkg-info or metadata or whatever it actually is that it contains.
And since this is such a wonderful bikeshed opportunity, I'd suggest you just pick whatever concept-neutral name you personally like the best ;)
Yes that was my point, but I can understand now why it is not the best move Tarek
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Tarek Ziadé <ziade.tarek@gmail.com> wrote:
Ok then, we will have to provide extra documentation to make people understand that the '.egg-info' directory has absolutely nothing to do with egg-the-format but is rather a metadata container.
'egg-info' was introduced with adding the whole 'egg' thing in Python in mind at some point I believe.
And it seems that the .egg directory/zip file for projects setuptools provides will not make it into Python and is still very controversial ( http://www.reddit.com/r/Python/comments/8he79/am_i_alone_in_feeling_like_pyt... )
So removing the 'egg' part of 'egg-info' seemed natural to me at this point.
Egg-the-format is what we are recreating in distutils, isn't it? Obviously some people are unhappy with some things related to packaging, but I don't think egg-the-format is something people actually mind (if they know what it is). Of course few people really know what the format is, or are able to distinguish it from other parts of the Setuptools stack, but that doesn't change just because you rename the extension. Eggs don't even carry any particular naming attachment to Setuptools. -- Ian Bicking | http://blog.ianbicking.org
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Ian Bicking <ianb@colorstudy.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Tarek Ziadé <ziade.tarek@gmail.com> wrote:
Ok then, we will have to provide extra documentation to make people understand that the '.egg-info' directory has absolutely nothing to do with egg-the-format but is rather a metadata container.
'egg-info' was introduced with adding the whole 'egg' thing in Python in mind at some point I believe.
And it seems that the .egg directory/zip file for projects setuptools provides will not make it into Python and is still very controversial
(http://www.reddit.com/r/Python/comments/8he79/am_i_alone_in_feeling_like_pyt...)
So removing the 'egg' part of 'egg-info' seemed natural to me at this point.
Egg-the-format is what we are recreating in distutils, isn't it?
for the .egg-info format yes, but the .egg format is not in the plan. (that what I called egg-the-format but I was wrong since .egg-info is also called a format in setuptools doc) but what is really is (even if it's part of the egg format) is a metadata container, (also present in .egg/EGG-INFO)
Obviously some people are unhappy with some things related to packaging, but I don't think egg-the-format is something people actually mind (if they know what it is). Of course few people really know what the format is, or are able to distinguish it from other parts of the Setuptools stack, but that doesn't change just because you rename the extension. Eggs don't even carry any particular naming attachment to Setuptools.
Sure that makes sense, Tarek -- Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org
participants (5)
-
Floris Bruynooghe -
Hanno Schlichting -
Ian Bicking -
P.J. Eby -
Tarek Ziadé