[Distutils] version scheme: a case for dropping ".devNNN" and ".postNNN"

Paul Moore p.f.moore at gmail.com
Thu Jun 11 11:51:36 CEST 2009

2009/6/11 Trent Mick <trentm at gmail.com>:
> # My conclusion/opinion
> In so far as the proposed new distutils versioning scheme is to be used
> for enforcing/encouraging versions for packages uploaded to PyPI, I don't
> believe there is a strong case for including ".devNNN" and certainly not
> ".postNNN".
> - It just isn't used often enough to justify the complexity in the version
>  scheme for packages on PyPI.
> - Setuptools' facility to do `install_requires = ["OtherProject==dev"]`
>  is a good thing, but this doesn't require the ".devNNNN" and post-release
>  tags on sdist/bdist packages uploaded to PyPI.
> - The other language repo systems don't demonstrate a need for this.
> - Pressure on project authors to do normal releases (rather than having a
> quick "dev sorta-release") when user's want it is a *good thing*.
> - Dropping this complexity in the version scheme documentation for users
> would allow us to spend more time educating Python module authors on
> more important best practices like incrementing the major version number
> for backward incompatible changes.

+1. That saved me from having to write an email which made this
argument, but far less effectively :-)


More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list