[Distutils] Delay acceptance of PEP 426 until after PyCon US?

[Nick Coghlan]

On 21 Feb 2013 02:12, "Daniel Holth" <dholth at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 9:48 PM, Daniel Holth <dholth at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > -1 The same arguments will just be repeated again.
>>
>> I'm not so sure - at the moment, I'm basically saying "trust me, I
>> have a plan for this". I do have a plan, and I've shared bits and
>> pieces of it with different people, but not put any of it together as
>> coherent proposals (not even as an essay on python-notes, which is
>> what I'm working on now).
>>
>> So I guess I'm really asking if there are any major plans people have
>> for the next month or so that hinge on using PEP 426 metadata rather
>> than setuptools metadata? If not, I think it's worth my taking the
>> time to give the PEP more context. Rolling out wheel support should be
>> enough to keep people busy for a while...
>
>
> As long as nobody minds that wheel uses Provides-Extra, utf-8 and
description-in-body right now. I don't think those particular features are
controversial.
>
> The current distribute (pkg_resources) implementation only parses
requirements out of metadata if it is inside a .dist-info directory and
only uses requires.txt if looking inside .egg-info (and does not have to
open or parse PKG-INFO at all in this case). So if you are using .dist-info
(used by wheel) then you need Metadata 1.2+ and if you are representing a
very significant portion of setuptools projects you will need
Provides-Extra.
>

OK, I can live with that. Aside from a couple of small tweaks and
additions, I think the format is mostly fine, but I want to get clearer
transition plans in place before I flip the status to Accepted.

Cheers,
Nick.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20130221/d16d4a4b/attachment.html>