Re: [Distutils] distlib and wheel metadata

2017-02-17 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2017-02-17 09:56:04 +0100 (+0100), Nick Coghlan wrote: [...] > So if we rely on a manual "publish with pinned dependencies", "get bug > report from redistributor or app developer", "republish with unpinned > dependencies", we'll be in a situation where: > > - the affected app developer or

Re: [Distutils] distlib and wheel metadata

2017-02-17 Thread Paul Moore
On 17 February 2017 at 08:56, Nick Coghlan wrote: > - we retain full control over the tone of the error notification I tried to formulate a long response to this email, and got completely bogged down. So I'm going to give a brief[1] response for now and duck out until the

Re: [Distutils] distlib and wheel metadata

2017-02-17 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 12:56 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > By contrast, if we design the metadata format such that *PyPI* can provide a > suitable error message, then: But all these benefits you're describing also work if you s/PyPI/setuptools/, no? And that doesn't require any

Re: [Distutils] distlib and wheel metadata

2017-02-17 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 15 Feb 2017 23:28, "Paul Moore" wrote: So, in summary, * I agree that libraries pinning dependencies too tightly is bad. * Distributions can easily enough report such pins upstream when the library is initially packaged, so there's no ongoing cost here (just possibly a