On 18 November 2015 at 05:51, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 05:40:33 +1300 > Robert Collins <robe...@robertcollins.net> wrote: >> >> Its included in the complete grammar, otherwise it can't be tested. >> Note that that the PEP body refers to the IETF document for the >> definition of URIs. e.g. exactly what you suggest. > > What I suggest is that the grammar doesn't try to define URIs at all,
We don't. We consume the definition the IETF give. > and instead includes a simple rule that is a superset of URI matching. > It doesn't make sense for Python packaging tools to detect what is a > valid URI or not. It's not their job, and the work will probably be > replicated by whatever URI-loading library they use anyway (since they > will pass it the URI by string, not by individual components). > > The only place where URIs are used seem to be the "urlspec" rule, and > probably you can accept any opaque string there. Uhm, why are you making this suggestion? What problem will we solve by using a proxy rule? -Rob -- Robert Collins <rbtcoll...@hp.com> Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
