[Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 345 : Metadata for Python Software Packages 1.2

David Lyon david.lyon at preisshare.net
Tue Dec 29 01:35:23 CET 2009


On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 18:55:17 -0500, "R. David Murray"
<rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote:
> What about specifying that the package works only with, say, 2.6.2 or
> earlier (because of some problem introduced by 2.6.3)?  That could get
> pretty darn verbose.  (Also remember we aren't just talking about the
> syntax for Python versions, but versions for any package).

That's why the range operator could be good.

  > Requires-python: 2.4:2.6.2

> I do think it is also a valid argument that, from what I've heard here,
> most extant (linux at least) packaging systems use the >=, etc,
operators,
> so I think talking about changing the proposed syntax radically is
> probably misplaced.

The counter argument for 'cloning' the linux packaging system is
that most of the representations come from a C perspective. Because
of the fact that Linux is predominantly a C product.

Since Python isn't C, and doesn't come from C, then one could
argue that using short-hand or high level notation is more
in keeping with the character of python. 

So the arguments against the >= == operators come from the desire
to keep what looks like C code, *out-of* python packaging.

I fully sympathise that some have the desire simply to clone
what's already out there. Why make new art when there's a
lot of old art already..

The price of doing that is we lose the specific short-handed
high-level nature of python. Which is what we were attracted
to in the first place.

David








More information about the Python-Dev mailing list