PEP 516 and pypa.json
Greetings! I saw PEP-0516 go through check-ins, and had a question about the pypa.json portion of the proposal -- namely, why are we using a .json file? I presume this is a file that will be created by hand, and while json is not as ugly as xml, it's certainly not pretty. Can we not use an .ini file, or a white-space significant format? The latter should be familiar, if not comfortable, to any Python programmer. -- ~Ethan~
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Ethan Furman
Greetings!
I saw PEP-0516 go through check-ins, and had a question about the pypa.json portion of the proposal -- namely, why are we using a .json file?
I presume this is a file that will be created by hand, and while json is not as ugly as xml, it's certainly not pretty.
Can we not use an .ini file, or a white-space significant format? The latter should be familiar, if not comfortable, to any Python programmer.
These are still draft proposals, and the actual file format is the least interesting question to discuss. Think of the JSON thing as being a placeholder for now :-). There is no obvious solution, because .ini files are extremely underspecified, nothing else is in the stdlib, yaml contains its own share of gibbering horrors, toml is not widely used and is associated with an extremely divisive figure, etc. etc. Don't worry, though: there will be bikeshedding. Ideally *after* the more substantive issues are settled :-) -n -- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
I'm still pulling for RFC 822 format :)
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016, 14:33 Nathaniel Smith
Greetings!
I saw PEP-0516 go through check-ins, and had a question about the
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Ethan Furman
wrote: pypa.json portion of the proposal -- namely, why are we using a .json file?
I presume this is a file that will be created by hand, and while json is not as ugly as xml, it's certainly not pretty.
Can we not use an .ini file, or a white-space significant format? The latter should be familiar, if not comfortable, to any Python programmer.
These are still draft proposals, and the actual file format is the least interesting question to discuss. Think of the JSON thing as being a placeholder for now :-).
There is no obvious solution, because .ini files are extremely underspecified, nothing else is in the stdlib, yaml contains its own share of gibbering horrors, toml is not widely used and is associated with an extremely divisive figure, etc. etc. Don't worry, though: there will be bikeshedding. Ideally *after* the more substantive issues are settled :-)
-n
-- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
On 02/18/2016 12:00 PM, Daniel Holth wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Ethan Furman wrote:
I saw PEP-0516 go through check-ins, and had a question about the pypa.json portion of the proposal -- namely, why are we using a .json file?
I presume this is a file that will be created by hand, and while json is not as ugly as xml, it's certainly not pretty.
I'm still pulling for RFC 822 format :)
You know what? xml is okay.* ;) -- ~Ethan~ * Not really! Just kidding!
participants (3)
-
Daniel Holth
-
Ethan Furman
-
Nathaniel Smith