On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 5:06 PM, Lennart Regebro <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:19 AM, anatoly techtonik <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Having a lot of meaningless options doesn't make meta data any more > clear. > > Well, they are not meaningless, but their role is fully fulfilled by > other > > options (Author and Maintainer fields in this particular case). > > > > The use case for the Author field is that if Author wants to be > contacted, > > (s)he leaves email. That's it. This use case should be described in the > > meta-data along with the format that are expected to be recognized by the > > software: > > > > Author: anatoly techtonik > > Author: anatoly techtonik <[email protected]> > > Author: anatoly techtonik <[email protected]>, Anything Else for > Humans, > > Or For Future Specs > > > > Here the field content defines its type - it's like duck typing for > > specification, which make specifications more pythonic. > > > > Is it good? > > Nope. Having a separate field for email makes it clear that you should > add the email there IMO. However, both author-email and > maintainer-email are redundant, as is author and maintainer. The > relevant info is maintainer, to be honest. > > //Lennart > Probably some projects have more than one person handling them. I agree that the author/maintainer distinction isn't interesting. A list of maintainer emails may be a good solution. Not that we can have any semblance of this on pypi, I just wanted to mention this is very nicely done on github e.g. https://github.com/mrdoob/three.js/contributors Yuval Greenfield
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
