[Distutils] RFC 2: PEP 541 - Package Index Name Retention

Matthias Bussonnier bussonniermatthias at gmail.com
Tue Jan 17 13:53:44 EST 2017

> One thing we could possibly do is provide the ability for, as part of the
> relqunishing process, “lock” the old versions that were uploaded so that the
> new owner can neither delete them or upload new files for them AND set a
> “minimum version” for new uploads for that project. This could mean that one
> could say that foobar < 4.0 is the old project and foobar >= 4.0 is the new
> project and existing == continue to work. I’m not sure I feel about that
> though.

Wouldn't that be a case where the version epoch[1] could (should?) be used ?

> If included in a version identifier, the epoch appears before all other components, separated from the release segment by an exclamation mark:

> E!X.Y  # Version identifier with epoch
> If no explicit epoch is given, the implicit epoch is 0 .

> Most version identifiers will not include an epoch, as an explicit epoch is only needed if a project changes the way it handles version numbering in a way that means the normal version ordering rules will give the wrong answer.



More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list