On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Jim Fulton <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Apr 10, 2009, at 10:30 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote: > >> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Jim Fulton <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Apr 9, 2009, at 6:40 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: >>> >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>> Hash: SHA1 >>>> >>>> Jim Fulton wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Apr 9, 2009, at 12:55 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: >>>>> ... >>>>>> >>>>>> I have backed off on the notion of overloading 'Requires:' / >>>>>> 'Provides:' >>>>>> / 'Obsoletes:', following Jim's notion of deprecating them in favor of >>>>>> new fields. I named them 'Requires-Dist:', 'Provides-Dist:', and >>>>>> 'Obsoletes-Dist'. >>>>>> >>>>>> "Stock" distutils should probably spell the arguments to >>>>>> distutils.core.setup predictably: 'requires_dist', 'provides_dist', >>>>>> 'obsoletes_dist'. setuptools can treat 'install_requires' as an >>>>>> undeprecated alias for 'requires_dist'. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> What is the rational for this? I'd strongly prefer the "requires" >>>>> argument name to be compatible with setuptools. Otherwise, I think >>>>> we'll introduce needless confusion. >>>> >>>> I'm aiming for self-consistency within the 'PKG-INFO' field names: >>>> >>>> - 'Requires' >>>> - 'Requires-Python' >>>> - 'Requires-External' >>>> >>>> The 'Obsoletes' and 'Provides' fields also need >>>> distutils-project-oriented versions, so picking a suffix ('-Dist') which >>>> matched for them seemed cleanest. >>>> >>>> Add that to the fact that setuptools has no way (yet) to spell >>>> 'provides' or 'obsoletes', and it seemed to me clearer to just make >>>> setuptools current argument an alias for the "consistent" version to be >>>> landed in distutils. >>> >>> >>> I get that. In fact, I already got that. :) I think backward >>> compatibility >>> with existing wide usage is more important and not incompatible. >> >> we could also support both spellings for one version, and deprecate >> the old name with a warning, > > > Strong: -1. > > Why change the name? A different name isn't going to be better enough to be > worth the hassle. Deprecation is waaaay overrated as a tool for reducing the > pain of making people change their code or habits.
I don't think it's a good idea to have a different name in PKG-INFO and in the arguments to describe the same element. we should have the same name everywhere for consistency at the end. I don't see anything wrong about adding a simple deprecation warning here, It won't happen again for quite a while. Distutils already had some argument name changes like that for backward compatiblity (licence<->license) but they were not displaying any warning. OTHO I'd be fine if the current setuptool name is used in PKG-INFO _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
