On 1 October 2014 00:34, Jeremy Stanley <fu...@yuggoth.org> wrote: > On 2014-09-30 07:26:32 -0400 (-0400), Donald Stufft wrote: > [...] >> I don’t personally believe it makes sense for a source >> distribution to have a build number. > [...] > > I'm becoming less and less convinced it actually *is* a source > distribution any more. My constant interaction with downstream Linux > distro packagers shows a growing disinterest in consuming release > "tarballs" of software, that they would generally prefer to pull > releases directly from tags in the project's revision control > systems instead.
Which distro packagers? For Fedora, even if we pull from an upstream source control system, we'll still wrap it as a tarball inside an SRPM in order to feed it into the buld system. > Couple this with the fact that setup.py sdist can > (and often does) include autogenerated content in its output which > the packagers would rather strip or regenerate themselves, and I'm > of the opinion that the tarballs I create are only for PyPI/pip > consumption any longer. This effectively makes them a > channel-specific packaging format rather than a generally reusable > release source artifact. Why is your setup.py sdist including autogenerated content? It shouldn't be doing that. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
