In the example setup.py would at least do the nested unzipping, but you would not be able to patch before running setup.py. Also expect disruption from future sdists that don't have setup.py. Both changes if implemented would surely be opt-in per dist and would not break everything all at once. Of course there would have to be a different #sha256= tag for a hash of the uncompressed contents. The 'multiple versions with different compression algorithms' idea assumes some consumers don't have .xz and would prefer the .gz version for example. FYI zipfile in Python 3 supports lzma compression.
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 10:59 AM Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: > > On Aug 22, 2016, at 10:29 AM, Daniel Holth <dho...@gmail.com> wrote: > > pypi is now free to re-compress without additional input from the > publisher. Both .gz and .lzma versions etc. could be offered. > > > > I am not opposed to changes to the file format to enable better > compression, that being said I’m not particularly motivated by the ability > to have PyPI re-compress things. It’s not something I can see PyPI ever > taking advantage of. In addition to that, you can’t really just change the > meaning of the existing things, like the #sha256=…. because you’ll break > every released version of pip to date (for example). > > — > > Donald Stufft >
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
