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