[Python-Dev] PEP 426 is now the draft spec for distribution metadata 2.0 (original) (raw)

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Mon Feb 18 00:54:12 CET 2013

On 18 Feb 2013 08:36, "Fred Drake" <fred at fdrake.net> wrote:

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote: > As Daniel pointed out, easyinstall and pip also don't follow this rule yet, > so it won't really have any impact if we never get to metadata 3.0. Actually, my point was that using a separate filename for version 2.0 would allow provision of both 1.x and 2.0, so version 2.0 metadata can be deployed as tool support becomes available, instead of having to wait until 1.x tools are replaced. Once tools are following the new rule about version compatibility, there's less worry about this (at least on my part).

None of sdist, wheel or the installation database currently support parallel metadata versions. Interpreting 2.0 metadata as 1.1 also won't be catastrophically wrong in general, especially if the production tools still also ship the legacy dependency and entry points data as separate files. The worst thing that is likely to happen is an old tool may fail to show a 2.0 style description.

However, I will update the PEP to state explicitly that tools should emit the lowest required metadata version for the fields being published.

Cheers, Nick.

-Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. "A storm broke loose in my mind." --Albert Einstein -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20130218/511d207b/attachment.html>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list