[Catalog-sig] [Distutils] pre-PEP : Synthesis of previous threads, and irc talks + proposals

Tarek Ziadé ziade.tarek at gmail.com
Wed Oct 1 19:55:59 CEST 2008

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Phillip J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
> I'm -1 on all of the above.  I think we need a standard for tools interop
> (ala WSGI), not implementation tweaks for the existing tools.  I also think
> that a concrete metadata format proposal is premature at this time; we've
> barely begun to gather -- let alone specify -- our requirements for that
> metadata.  (Essentially, only version dependencies have been discussed,

What are the other important points we need to discuss at this point
in your opinion ?

> There have been many people agreeing that the distutils are thoroughly
> broken and a new approach is needed; these  proposals sound like minor
> tweaks to the existing infrastructure, rather than a way to get rid of it.
>  So to me, the above doesn't seem like a synthesis of the threads that I've
> been reading.
>> 4/ let's change PyPI to make it work with the new metadata and to
>> enforce a few things
>> Enforcements:
>>    - a binary distribution cannot be uploaded if a source distrbution
>> has not been previously provided for the version
> Note that this doesn't allow closed-source packages to be uploaded; thus it
> would need to be a warning, rather than a requirement.

Right. do you agree it is something useful to do ?

>> New features:
>>   - we should be able to download the metadata of a package without
>> downloading the package
>>   - PyPI should display the install and test dependencies in the UI
> It could only do this for specific binaries, since dependencies can be
> dynamic.

What dynamic means here ? the python module to static file process or more ?
can you provide an example ?


Tarek Ziadé | Association AfPy | www.afpy.org
Blog FR | http://programmation-python.org
Blog EN | http://tarekziade.wordpress.com/

More information about the Catalog-SIG mailing list