[Distutils] Removing the aspirational aspects of PEP 426

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Oct 28, 2015 3:25 AM, "Nick Coghlan" <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
[...]
> From an sdist metadata perspective, though, I think the right thing to do
is to descope PEP 426 to just the stuff we *need* for the build system
improvements, and defer everything else (e.g. JSON-LD, SPDX, richer
dependency semantics, etc) to a future metadata 3.0 proposal (or
potentially metadata extensions, or 2.x format updates).

I think PEP 426 is actually orthogonal to these proposals. AFAICT, the only
reason Robert's PEP as written requires PEP 426 is that he needs a standard
serializable format to list dependencies... but he actually defines such a
format about 10 lines above for the static bootstrap-requirements key, i.e.
a list of specifier strings. So it actually makes more sense to use that
for dynamic requirements too for internal consistency, and leave PEP 426
out of it.

-n
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20151028/92e9e7e3/attachment.html>