[Distutils] FINAL DRAFT: Dependency specifier PEP

[Robert Collins]

On 18 November 2015 at 05:51, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 05:40:33 +1300
> Robert Collins <robertc at robertcollins.net> wrote:
>>
>> Its included in the complete grammar, otherwise it can't be tested.
>> Note that that the PEP body refers to the IETF document for the
>> definition of URIs. e.g. exactly what you suggest.
>
> What I suggest is that the grammar doesn't try to define URIs at all,

We don't. We consume the definition the IETF give.

> and instead includes a simple rule that is a superset of URI matching.
> It doesn't make sense for Python packaging tools to detect what is a
> valid URI or not. It's not their job, and the work will probably be
> replicated by whatever URI-loading library they use anyway (since they
> will pass it the URI by string, not by individual components).
>
> The only place where URIs are used seem to be the "urlspec" rule, and
> probably you can accept any opaque string there.

Uhm, why are you making this suggestion? What problem will we solve by
using a proxy rule?

-Rob


-- 
Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com>
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud