[Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 386 for addition (original) (raw)
Darren Dale dsdale24 at gmail.com
Thu Dec 10 13:40:06 CET 2009
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 386 for addition
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 386 for addition
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 7:24 AM, ssteinerX at gmail.com <ssteinerx at gmail.com> wrote:
On Dec 10, 2009, at 3:44 AM, Malthe Borch wrote:
On 12/8/09 6:16 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote: I believe that the current situation is as close to consensus as we will get on distutils-sig, and in the interests of avoiding months of further discussion which won't take things any further, I propose to allow final comments from python-dev and then look for a final decision.
Great work, Tarek. I think you've managed to establish a good body of knowledge on this and the proposal seems sound. That said, I think the terms
LooseVersion
andStrictVersion
are less than optimal. Really, what's meant isLexicalVersion
andChronologicalVersion
(orNumberedVersion
). It's not about strictness or looseness. I agree about the impreciseness of these terms. I'm not sure what the correct terminology is...
Those aren't new proposals, though, they already exist in distutils.
Darren
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 386 for addition
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 386 for addition
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]