"P.J. Eby" <p...@telecommunity.com> writes: > At 10:32 AM 11/28/2009 +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > > Moreover, AIUI there is no injunction that all projects must follow > > exactly the semantics of PEP 386, right? So why not have a *simple* > > standard (all version string components compared alphanumerically) > > in PEP 386, that is known to work unmodified with existing package > > systems, without Python-specific translation layers for version > > comparison? > > For the simple reason that it involves asking one group of people to > change how they work -- with no immediate benefit -- so that another > group can avoid having to change how they work.
My understanding of PEP 386 is that it *isn't* about asking Python developers to change how they work. Is that not right? > Why should developers change, and packagers not? Packagers *do* change how they work; Piotr has been explaining at length how packagers put in efforts to meet version-comparison semantics half way. I'm asking that the standardisation effort at least not make this effort more difficult that it needs to be. Moreover, what is a standard for if not for encouraging people to follow it for the benefit of many? > It's simply not an equitable request, which is why the proposal is > unrealistic. I think you're reading a proposal that I didn't write. -- \ “Our task must be to free ourselves from our prison by widening | `\ our circle of compassion to embrace all humanity and the whole | _o__) of nature in its beauty.” —Albert Einstein | Ben Finney _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
