On May 11, 2016 6:33 PM, "Donald Stufft" <don...@stufft.io> wrote: > [...] > > I don't like any of these options nearly as much as [package] TBH. I don’t > think that base, super, common, standard, or shared are any less ambiguous than > package (in fact I think they are _more_ ambigious). > > > I don't really think of it as package vs tool, I think of it as an implicit > <standard stuff> vs an explicit <third party stuff>. I think it makes the file > uglier to have the <standard stuff> explicit, particularly since I think the > example should really be something like: > > [standard.package.build-system] > requires = ["setuptools", "wheel"] > > [tool.flake8] > ... > > Because the value of the [package] namespace isn't that it separates us from > the [tool] namespace (we could get that easily without it), but that it > separates us from *other*, non packaging related but "standard" stuff that > might be added in the future.
Can you give an example of something that would go in your hypothetical implicit a pyproject.tml [standard] section, but that would not be related to configuring that project's package/packages and thus go into [package]? Partly asking because I'm not sure what the difference is between a "project" and a "package", partly because if we can articulate a clear guideline then that'd be useful for the future. -n
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
