On 21 May 2015 at 10:52, Wes Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > On May 20, 2015 7:43 PM, "Nick Coghlan" <[email protected]> wrote: >> One of my hopes for the metadata extension system in PEP 426 is that >> we'll be able to define extensions like "fedora.repackage", >> "debian.repackage" or "conda.repackage" which include whatever >> additional info is needed to automate creation of a policy compliant >> downstream package in a format that's a purely additive complement to >> the upstream metadata, rather than being somewhat duplicative as is >> the case today with things like spec files, deb control files, and >> conda recipes. > > http://conda.pydata.org/docs/bdist_conda.html bdist_conda?
conda has the benefit of *not* renaming Python packages in convoluted ways that interfere with automated identification of dependencies :) Both conda and Linux distros run into the "it's difficult/impossible to describe external binary dependencies in a cross-platform way" problem, though. While https://www.biicode.com/ is interesting in the context of CMake based projects, that still excludes a lot of software. (RYPPL is another I'd heard of, but it's GitHub repo hasn't seen much activity since 2013, and ryppl.org appears to be entirely dead) Regards, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [email protected] | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
