Re: [Distutils] RFC : PEP 376 - egg.info
At 06:01 PM 5/4/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:48 PM, P.J. Eby <pje@telecommunity.com> wrote:
I don't see any point to the normalization.
To avoid different naming conventions like:
PKG-INFO, requires.txt, SOURCES.txt
And the problem with that is...?
inconsistency, but right, it makes no sense if any file/dir can be added there.
What about SOURCES.txt btw ? What is the reason to add it ?
It's for source distributions. It allows them to be able to rebuild an identical source distribution in the absence of source control metadata. It's not really necessary for the installation process, although it's used to figure out which files to install if you use include_package_data=True.
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 7:51 PM, P.J. Eby <pje@telecommunity.com> wrote:
At 06:01 PM 5/4/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:48 PM, P.J. Eby <pje@telecommunity.com> wrote:
I don't see any point to the normalization.
To avoid different naming conventions like:
PKG-INFO, requires.txt, SOURCES.txt
And the problem with that is...?
inconsistency, but right, it makes no sense if any file/dir can be added there.
What about SOURCES.txt btw ? What is the reason to add it ?
It's for source distributions. It allows them to be able to rebuild an identical source distribution in the absence of source control metadata.
It's not really necessary for the installation process, although it's used to figure out which files to install if you use include_package_data=True.
Any particular reason to call it "SOURCES.txt" ? Or we can call it MANIFEST (with '/'-separated relative path) -- Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org
participants (2)
-
P.J. Eby -
Tarek Ziadé