[Distutils] RFC: PEP 566 - Metadata for Python Software Packages 1.3

[Paul Moore]

On 5 December 2017 at 20:34, Dustin Ingram <di at di.codes> wrote:
> Ah, I see, by "other two" I thought you meant the other two new fields.
>
> Looking at https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0566/ might make it
> more clear that I originally intended the "New in Version 1.3" and
> "Changed in Version 1.3" headings to only be under the "Fields"
> heading, so the outline would be:
>
> * Abstract
> * Fields
>   - New in Version 1.3
>     * Description-Content-Type (optional)
>     * Provides-Extra (optional, multiple use)
>   - Changed in Version 1.3
>     * Name
> * Version Specifiers
> * Environment markers
> * JSON-compatible Metadata
> * Summary of Differences From PEP 345
> * References
> * Copyright
> * Acknowledgements
>
> However I could see the value in inverting this a bit to be:
>
> * Abstract
> * New in Version 1.3
>   - Fields
>     * Description-Content-Type (optional)
>     * Provides-Extra (optional, multiple use)
> * Changed in Version 1.3
>   - Fields
>     * Name
>   - Version Specifiers
>   - Environment markers
>   - JSON-compatible Metadata
> * Summary of Differences From PEP 345
> * References
> * Copyright
> * Acknowledgements
>
> If this is preferable.

Oh! Sorry, I follow now. I'd misunderstood the structure completely -
my mistake. I was thinking of "Version Specifiers" and "Environment
Markers" as fields, when they aren't - they are *part* of certain
fields. The table of contents is completely clear, though, it's just
that I wasn't concentrating so much when I read that.

I'd say it's fine as it stands. Thanks for clarifying.

Paul