On 15 Apr 2014, at 03:50, Stephen J. Turnbull
So, as I understand what you're saying, PEP 440 *does* support a large subset of the semantic versioning actually used on PyPI (63/64 = 98.5%). I find that simple math a pretty compelling reason not to make the PEP 440 spec more complicated.
You can think of it that way. I’m more worried because i see it the other way around: I suspect that up to 64 % of the projects actually follow semver (1 % for sure) and only by chance follow PEP 440 ;). Encouraging semver in PEP 440 would in my opinion have made versioning of python modules more meaningful and compatible with a widely used “standard” across languages. Anyhow, i can see that there’s not much support for this, but at least i tried bringing it up. Thanks for the feedback. Cheers, Jörn