[Distutils] PEP 426: proposed change to extension fields + entry points

[Vinay Sajip]

Daniel Holth <dholth <at> gmail.com> writes:


> I can accept a rename but there is no way to avoid having 2 names not 1 new
> name for the feature.
> We go halfway now. The next version can go any other way.

Just to be clear, the naming of "exports" vs. "entry points" was not the main
thrust of my point - I mentioned it purely by way of explaining that part of the
JSON snippet I posted.

What I meant to say is that that parsing or writing a JSON file called
entry_points.txt (or whatever) is just as easy as parsing or writing an
ini-format file. However, the benefit of JSON is clear when composing a larger
set of data from separate files (see the separate thread about metadata caching).

One can more easily compose the data in entry_points.txt, METADATA,
requires-dist.txt and anything else if they are just JSON files. That is what I
do in my JSON metadata format - the dependency information is extracted from the
metadata for a release into an aggregated form which is easier to use when doing
dependency resolution.

Regards,

Vinay Sajip