On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Gerry Reno <[email protected]> wrote: > Tarek Ziadé wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:12 AM, Gerry Reno <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The problem is that there appears to be no way to get a coordinated behavior > between 'sdist' and 'bdist_rpm' as far as version and release strings are > concerned that will satisfy both tarballs and bdist packages. > > > If I understand your problem correclty, if sdist would simply > concatenate the version string and > the release string to use it as a "source version" when it starts to work, > you would be able to work things out ? > > > I don't know the internals of 'sdist' but I think if there were a way to > extend 'sdist' to use 'release' as well as 'version' then that might work. > I would have to test that to see. >
Well, can you define how sdist should behave exactly ? Based on that discussion I can make a prototype for you to try out, then we can maybe propose in that mailing list a change to sdist Regards Tarek -- Tarek Ziadé | Association AfPy | www.afpy.org Blog FR | http://programmation-python.org Blog EN | http://tarekziade.wordpress.com/ _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
