[Distutils] RFC PEP 386 : Version comparisons

[Jim Fulton]

On Jul 3, 2009, at 8:20 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:

> Hello
>
> back to that discussion, after re-reading all the threads I have a  
> proposal :
>
> 1- let's add as we said "install_requires" in PEP 345 and describe in
> it that people can define requirements,
>  but without giving them rules for the version schemes.
>
>  We will just write in that PEP that it's up to the *dependency
> manager* (pip, setuptools, zc.buildout, etc)
>  to provide a cmp() for the version.

+1

>  The only rule will be that each dependency is described like this :
>
>     dist_name [<|>|==|!=|>=|<=] version
>
>  where version is free and dist_name in [a-zA-Z0-9]

s/dist_name/project_name/

Your restriction on dist/project name is too tight. Unfortunately, I  
don't think there are currently restrictions on project names, but  
that's a different battle. :)  I think there was some discussion  
recently about not allowing spaces in project names. Maybe we could  
get away with disallowing spaces in project names in install_requires.


> 2- let's drop PEP 386 completely

+1

>
> 3- I'll start a separate, standalone project that contains the less
> controversial form of verlib.py, (the one that doesn't contains the
> post-dev stuff)
>    so we won't lose the work we all did in that.
>
>
> Any thoughts ?


Big +1. :)

Getting install_requires would help me make progress on buildout for  
Python 3.

Jim

--
Jim Fulton
Zope Corporation