On Nov 26, 2015, at 02:13 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
PEP 476 rejected providing a public indefinitely maintained API for this, so PEP 493 is specifically about helping commercial redistributors offer a smoother transition plan to customers without affecting the public Python level API, and without encouraging a plethora of mutually incompatible transition schemes.
Of course, the API would only have to be support for the life of 2.7; it would never go in 3.x so the burden is minimal.
PEP 493 isn't about attempting to rehash the PEP 476 discussions in search of a different conclusion, so this would need to be a different PEP, preferably one that targets Python 3.6 first and covers more than just HTTPS.
That seems like overkill. PEP 493 is specifically about Python 2.7 and providing ways for downstreams to facilitate more choice for end-users and end-administrators. Although I think it could safely sneak in after rc1, that would be for the RM to decide. Even if it were deferred to 2.7.12, it would still provide a better, more consistent experience if implemented upstream.