[Distutils] PEP440 "Local versions" idea in rpm/deb?

Marcus Smith qwcode at gmail.com
Tue May 6 00:48:46 CEST 2014


>
>
> In the custom RPM case, the PEP 440 "local version" and the leading
> numeric portion of the RPM "release" should *still* be the same (just as
> they should be for distro packages), but you'd choose a different local
> version/RPM release value based on how you wanted the ordering to be
> handled relative to other RPMs - it wouldn't be governed by any Python
> level policy.
>
> However, I'm wondering if the rules for local version identifiers should
> be relaxed to allow arbitrary alphanumeric subcomponents in the integrator
> suffix. The RPM release field allows things like "0.git.15.abcdefabc" - I'd
> really like to be able to publish that as the "local version" in the Python
> metadata.
>
> From Barry's description of the "2ubuntu3" style suffixes used when Ubuntu
> includes patches Debian doesn't, a more permissive integrator suffix would
> also help in the Debian/Ubuntu ecosystem.
>

yea, if you recall, at one point that idea was ".localN", then it switched
to "-N"
the switch seemed to be in this post where Donald references a discussion
with Noah.
https://bitbucket.org/pypa/pypi-metadata-formats/issue/1/add-integrator-suffix-to-pep-440#comment-5773507

wondering if alphanumerics were intentionally excluded, or just not
considered given the context at the time was about ".localN" vs "-N"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20140505/051ca360/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list