[Python-ideas] support toml for pyproject support
mertz at gnosis.cx
Mon Oct 8 09:26:12 EDT 2018
I agree here. I briefly urged against using the less used TOML format, but
I have no real skin in the game around packaging. I like YAML, but that's
also not in the standard library, even if more widely used.
But given that packaging is committed to TOML, I think that's a strong case
for including a library in stdlib. The PEP 517/518 authors had their
reasons that were accepted. Now there is broad ecosystem that is built on
that choice. Let's support it.
On Mon, Oct 8, 2018, 8:03 AM Anders Hovmöller <boxed at killingar.net> wrote:
> >> He's referring to PEPs 518 and 517 , which indeed standardize on
> >> TOML as a file format for Python package build metadata.
> >> I think moving anything into the stdlib would be premature though –
> >> TOML libraries are under active development, and the general trend in
> >> the packaging space has been to move things *out* of the stdlib (e.g.
> >> there's repeated rumblings about moving distutils out), because the
> >> stdlib release cycle doesn't work well for packaging infrastructure.
> > If I had the energy to argue it I would also argue against using TOML
> > in those PEPs. I personally don't especially care for TOML and what's
> > "obvious" to Tom is not at all obvious to me. I'd rather just stick
> > with YAML or perhaps something even simpler than either one.
> This thread isn't about regretting past decisions but what makes sense
> given current realities though.
> / Anders
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-ideas