On 14 January 2016 at 20:12, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 14 January 2016 at 15:55, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: >> - build some test wheels >> - write a proper PEP >> - convince pip and pypi maintainers that this is a good idea ;-) > > While I've historically advocated against the idea of defining our own > "Linux platform ABI" subset, the fact that Enthought and Continuum are > successfully distributing pre-built binaries through the simple "use > CentOS 5.11" approach seems promising. > > In terms of non-scientific packages, the main group I'd suggest > getting in touch with is pycryptography, as we'll probably want to > baseline a more recent version of OpenSSL than the one in CentOS 5.11.
Ah, looking at https://github.com/manylinux/auditwheel, I see anything linking to OpenSSL would fail the platform audit, at least for the current draft policy. That also seems like a potentially reasonable approach (although it could lead to complaints about "Why doesn't project <X> offer a wheel file?") Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
