On Feb 26, 2014, at 4:48 PM, Nick Coghlan <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 27 Feb 2014 04:00, "Donald Stufft" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I will accordingly be updating the defined metadata version in PEP 426 > > > to 3.0, and including an explicit admonition to *never* include > > > experimental metadata (whether in the base format or as part of an > > > experimental extension) in the main pydist.json file. Experimental > > > metadata should only ever appear in tool-specific files (which don't > > > need to guarantee any kind of interoperability with other tools). > > > > > > In the meantime: please don't publish pydist.json files, use some > > > other filename if you want to experiment with JSON based metadata in > > > advance of the acceptance of PEP 426. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Nick. > > > > This shouldn’t matter. Tools shouldn’t be trusting a pydist.json just > > because > > one exists and the Wheel format should have a version bump before you > > can start trusting them anyways. > > It's post-install and *post PEP 426 acceptance* that concerns me. Once PEP > 426 is accepted, we'll need a reliable way to distinguish pydist.json files > in the standard format from these experimental prototypes. > > Now, we could add some extra validity rules (such as "must come from a 1.1+ > wheel file or a 2.0+ sdist"), but that seems fragile to me, since those > markers likely won't be available once the package is installed. > > By contrast, skipping straight to 3.0 will make it easy for tools to > distinguish between files that are intended to be PEP compliant, and those > that may contain data in formats based on an earlier draft. > > That said, I guess another alternative is to handle it through parsing error > fallbacks, and include a recommendation in PEP 426 that if pydist.json is > missing or fails to parse correctly, they should fall back to checking for > setuptools style metadata. > > If Vinay is happy with that last option for handling the current bdist_wheel > misbehaviour that would mean we could leave the metadata version alone, and > just add the guidelines regarding publishing draft metadata and handling > malformed or missing metadata. > > Cheers, > Nick. Well I don’t really care if we do 3.0 or 2.0 it’s just a number. I just mean that you shouldn’t parse a pydist.json inside of a Wheel unless you know it’s inside of a Wheel with Wheel-Version: Whatever-We-Formally-Add-Pydistjson-To-Wheel in. ----------------- Donald Stufft PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
