[Catalog-sig] PEP 314: latest draft
Andrew Kuchling
akuchlin@mems-exchange.org
Wed, 7 May 2003 11:02:00 -0400
--V0207lvV8h4k8FAm
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 05:14:05PM -0700, Kevin Turner wrote:
>Since License is not optional, it might be good to retain it explicitly
>in the interface. Otherwise you either end up distributing packages
Not optional within the PKG-INFO data format, but it can be omitted in
a setup.py in which case the License field will just get 'UNKNOWN'.
>of Classifiers for required elements. The documentation for Classifiers
>becomes more complicated as well, "multiple use but must include at
>least one of ..."
True. On the other hand, I don't know if PyPI looks at the license
field and treats it as equivalent to "License :: whatever" so that
searches by license work. (Similar question for Platform...)
To my mind, having both classifiers and separate fields violates TOOWTDI.
--amk (www.amk.ca)
Grinding oppression of the masses is the only policy that pays dividends.
-- The Collector, in "The Sunmakers"
--V0207lvV8h4k8FAm
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE+uR/okTvcXou9d/ARAv5YAJ9vunwYnFltAzQENmEUYW/LJS4mQgCglVLr
VxF4NPyz1fDHls5U0u1wI6s=
=Enfn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--V0207lvV8h4k8FAm--