Yes, but the METADATA version of the metadata is not a standard.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: > > On Feb 27, 2014, at 9:13 AM, Daniel Holth <dho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I don't think it matters which number we use in the METADATA key/value >> metadata... it's not even checked by anything. >> >> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 7:16 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 27 February 2014 18:16, Vinay Sajip <vinay_sa...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>>>> but my question was what are you adding, if anything, >>>>> that warranted it having "Metadata-Version: 2.0"? >>>> >>>> I believe that the fields 'Private-Version', 'Obsoleted-By', >>>> 'Setup-Requires-Dist', >>>> 'Extension' and 'Provides-Extra' were added on top of the 1.2 metadata in >>>> an >>>> early version of PEP 426, before the move to JSON. >>> >>> For the record, >>> http://hg.python.org/peps/file/3b67372b39ba/pep-0426.txt is the last >>> version prior to the switch to JSON, and the summary of differences is >>> at http://hg.python.org/peps/file/3b67372b39ba/pep-0426.txt#l1263 >>> >>> At that time, I think wheel still had a dependency on PEP 426 - >>> changing wheels to work with the setuptools metadata was a relatively >>> late change after we realised it made sense to decouple the two >>> activities. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Nick. >>> >>> -- >>> Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia >> _______________________________________________ >> Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig > > Compliance to standards matter. It's how you get reasonable interoperability. > > ----------------- > Donald Stufft > PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA > _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
