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

P.J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Fri Jun 12 03:48:09 CEST 2009

At 09:11 PM 6/11/2009 -0400, Tres Seaver wrote:
>Assuming that we add the requisite 'build_number' field to PKG_INFO,
>could we allow spelling a dependency on a combined version + build
>number using an "odd" spelling, such as: '1.2.3#4567' or '1.2.3 at 4567'?

And if we make that special string "dev" or "post", then we get 
backwards compatibility and upgrade options for setuptools users, 
too.  Great idea.  ;-)

>This spelling would be *disallowed* for "released" packages, but could
>still satisfy the folks who use such dependencies in internal-only
>development mode.

I don't see what usefulness such a disallowal would have.  PyPI 
already accepts all sorts of stupid versions, including ones even 
setuptools can't make any sense of.  And for packages installed on 
the machine, the build information is still going to need to be in 
any generated filenames, such as that of the .egg-info directory or 
the egg file itself.

More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list