[Catalog-sig] RE: [Distutils] RFC: PEP 243: Module Repository Upload Mechanism
Tue, 20 Mar 2001 09:25:00 -0000
From: Sean Reifschneider [mailto:email@example.com]
> PEP: 243
> Title: Module Repository Upload Mechanism
> platform (optional) -- A string representing the target
> platform for this distribution. This is only for binary
> distributions. It is encoded as
> "<os_name>-<os_version>-<platform architecture>".
This probably needs to include the Python version for which a binary
distribution was compiled.
> signature (optional) -- A GPG signature of the uploaded
> distribution as signed by the author. This may be used by the
> cataloging system to automate acceptance of uploads.
Why GPG? Is that available on all platforms? Could PGP signatures be used
for people on Windows (for example), who probably don't have GPG?
> The upload client must submit the page in the same form as
> Netscape Navigator version 4.76 for Linux produces when presented
> with the following form:
I'd suggest this format be spelled out. I don't have Linux or Netscape, so I
can't determine what the submitted page should look like from this
> The following are valid os names:
dos? beos? mac? This feels very Unix-specific...
> Version is the official version string specified by the vendor for
> the particular release. For example, "nt" (Windows), "9.04"
> (HP-UX), "7.0" (RedHat, Mandrake).
That's not likely to be precise enough. Is Windows 2000 "2000" or "nt"? It's
binary-compatible with NT. Same goes (and more so) for Windows 9x, which are
most definitely NOT NT, but which are binary-compatible.
Take a Windows security module. It's binary compatible with Windows 9x, NT,
and 2000. But the API calls involved either don't exist, or produce errors
or do nothing on Windows 9x, which has no security features (ducks, waiting
for the "Windows in general has no security features" jokes :-)