On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 9:48 PM, Daniel Holth <dho...@gmail.com> wrote: > > -1 The same arguments will just be repeated again. > > I'm not so sure - at the moment, I'm basically saying "trust me, I > have a plan for this". I do have a plan, and I've shared bits and > pieces of it with different people, but not put any of it together as > coherent proposals (not even as an essay on python-notes, which is > what I'm working on now). > > So I guess I'm really asking if there are any major plans people have > for the next month or so that hinge on using PEP 426 metadata rather > than setuptools metadata? If not, I think it's worth my taking the > time to give the PEP more context. Rolling out wheel support should be > enough to keep people busy for a while... As long as nobody minds that wheel uses Provides-Extra, utf-8 and description-in-body right now. I don't think those particular features are controversial. The current distribute (pkg_resources) implementation only parses requirements out of metadata if it is inside a .dist-info directory and only uses requires.txt if looking inside .egg-info (and does not have to open or parse PKG-INFO at all in this case). So if you are using .dist-info (used by wheel) then you need Metadata 1.2+ and if you are representing a very significant portion of setuptools projects you will need Provides-Extra.
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig