[Distutils] PEP 426, round 733 ;)

Philippe Ombredanne pombredanne at nexb.com
Sun Feb 17 02:43:29 CET 2013

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> The version scheme is not going to change. The point of PEP 386 was,
> to a very large extent, to define a scheme that *existing PyPI
> projects* either already comply with, or will require only minor
> cosmetic changes to comply with (such as inserting an extra period to
> turn X.YdevN into X.Y.devN). [....]
> We already know the most likely outcome of such an effort: people will simply stick
> with v1.1 of the metadata scheme and continuing to use the existing
> packaging tools, as migrating to the new ones would require a whole
> lot pointless busywork to redesign their build processes and
> workflows.
This is in fact  the killer argument here, i.e. even though I may not
like all that much
some of the supported proposed scheme, the practicality of adopting
and supporting
existing practices trumps IMHO all other arguments.
So any objections I brought here about the version schemes are
addressed by your answers :)
I particularly like the wording you have in the PEP where you
explicitly support but do not encourage more byzantine version

Philippe Ombredanne

+1 650 799 0949 | pombredanne at nexB.com
DejaCode Enterprise at http://www.dejacode.com
nexB Inc. at http://www.nexb.com

More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list