[Distutils] PEP 426 is now the draft spec for distribution metadata 2.0

[Daniel Holth]

Makes sense. Even 1.2 has maintainer. It probably wouldn't be too intrusive
to spit out a few more fields in distutils. I don't know about pypi which
usually gets metadata as a dictionary.
On Feb 23, 2013 10:51 PM, "Chris Jerdonek" <chris.jerdonek at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 2:10 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Maintainer (optional)
> > ---------------------
> >
> > A string containing the maintainer's name at a minimum; additional
> > contact information may be provided.
> >
> > Note that this field is intended for use when a project is being
> > maintained by someone other than the original author:  it should be
> > omitted if it is identical to ``Author``.
>
> I'm wondering whether Metadata 2.0 can help in rectifying the fact
> that the contents of the Author field are blown away by the contents
> of the Maintainer field when used with current tools (e.g. distutils,
> Distribute/setuptools, PyPI) as described in issues 16403 and 16108,
> etc ([1], [2]).  If backwards compatibility is the issue, maybe
> Metadata 2.0 can help by providing the way forward.
>
> [1] http://bugs.python.org/issue16403
> [2] http://bugs.python.org/issue16108
>
> --Chris
> _______________________________________________
> Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20130223/8a71ef22/attachment.html>