On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 5:38 AM, Philippe Ombredanne <pombreda...@nexb.com> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 2:10 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> The latest draft of PEP 426 is up at http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0426/ > This is looking great! > >> License (optional) >> ------------------ > [...] >> The full text of the license would normally be included in a separate >> file. > > I know it is late in the game to do modifications but I often find > myself chasing down the actual full text of a license in a > distribution. > Would you be open to a new optional field that could point to the > license file(s) that may be present with the distribution?
I'm not sure a new field would help you much anyway, since anyone that doesn't put their license file in one of the obvious places (COPYING, LICENSE, LICENSE.txt) isn't likely to populate such a field. So, not for 2.0. There's already a lot of changes in this version, and I'd like to see a more persuasive case made that such a field would be used consistently enough to be helpful before adding it. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
