Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan <at> gmail.com> writes: > * "install": the installation specifier for the dependency > * "extra": as per the current PEP (for conditional dependencies) > * "environment": as per the current PEP (for conditional dependencies) > > 4. The "install" subfield is compulsory, the other two are optional > (as now, using either of the latter creates a "conditional > dependency", while dependency declarations with only the "install" > subfield are unconditional) > > 5. An installation specifier is what PEP 426 currently calls a > dependency specifier: the "name [extras] (constraints)" format. They > will get their own top level section (similar to the existing Extras > and Environment markers sections)
Is there a particular benefit of the install subfield being a single installation specifier, as opposed to a list of such specifiers? It's perhaps neither here nor there for machine-processed metadata, but I expect this metadata would have human readers too. Not using a list would lead to more verbose metadata. Regards, Vinay Sajip _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
