[Distutils] New PEP : dependency specification

[Daniel Holth]

LGTM

To clarify in this spec to specify a couple of requirements for the [foo]
extra would you have to say

[foo] requests
[foo] sqlalchemy

Compare to requires.txt from setuptools which IIRC is a plain text file
like so, with normal requirements not in a section, and extra or
conditional requirements in sections named [extra_name;marker]:

unconditional
requirements==4.7

[;marker]
non-extra requirement if marker evaluates to true

[extra]
unconditional
requirements
for
extra

[extra;marker]
requirement for extra with if marker evaluates to true

On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 12:45 PM Marcus Smith <qwcode at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>> The language defined is a compact line based format which is already in
>> widespread use
>
>
> this is the most critical thing for me, and the reason this approach seems
> more attractive than the path of PEP426, although I'd certainly like to see
> Nick's reaction.
>
> PEP426 tries to cover how names/specifiers/extras/markers would be put
> together in abstract "in-memory representation" (that can be serialized to
> json), but it's left open to pip (and other tools) to lay down a standard
> (via implementation) for how these pieces are put together and used by
> users.
>
> this PEP would dictate both, right?  the user way, and the internal
> metadata way....
>
> _______________________________________________
> Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20151106/344af8c0/attachment.html>