[Distutils] Handling Case/Normalization Differences

[Chris Jerdonek]

On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 7:15 PM, Donald Stufft <donald at stufft.io> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2014, at 08:15 PM, Chris Jerdonek wrote:
>> I don't know exactly.  I'd say a change that in your judgment you
>> think has a non-trivial chance of breaking existing tools.  Holger is
>> probably in a better position to say.  I was just speaking in support
>> of his request, which seemed reasonable to me.
>>
>> --Chris
>
> Which is exactly my point. This change was minor. It didn't break
> anything
> but devpi and it wouldn't have broken devpi to my knowledge except for
> an assert statement that wasn't particularly needed.
>
> I already give notice (and discussion, often times even PEPs) for any
> change
> that I believe to be breaking. Wanting more is wanting notice on every
> single change on the off chance someone somewhere might have some
> dependency on any random implementation detail.

If you don't have a good sense of what changes might break existing
tools and don't want to notify people, one possibility is to build in
a delay between committing to the repo and deploying to production.
Interested folks could monitor commits to the repo -- giving them a
chance to ask questions and update their tools if necessary.

--Chris


>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Donald Stufft <donald at stufft.io> wrote:
>> > Changes like what exactly? This was a fairly minor change which is why there wasn't more notice.
>> >
>> >> On Sep 1, 2014, at 7:44 PM, Chris Jerdonek <chris.jerdonek at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> FWIW, as a community member it doesn't seem unreasonable to me to
>> >> expect that a certain amount of advance notice be given for changes
>> >> like this, *especially* given that the tools are undocumented.