On 02:24 pm, [email protected] wrote:
"Martin v. L�wis" wrote:
Programming Language - Python - Implementation - CPython
Programming Language - Python - Implementation - pypy
Programming Language - Python - Implementation - jython
Programming Language - Python - Implementation - IronPython
Opinions on this proposal? (including the specific spelling,
leaving alone that the separator is ::, not -)
Better user CPython, PyPy and Jython for consistency with the
other Trove spellings.
I'm -0 on the "Implementation" part. Do we really need this ?
These seem like a different sort of thing than the existing classifiers
like
Programming Language :: Python :: 2.7
It seems that each implementation is trying to provide compatibility
with a particular CPython release. You could imagine a project
specifying
Programming Language :: Python :: 2.7
Programming Language :: Python :: Implementation :: Jython
To indicate that a Jython release implementing Python 2.7 is required,
and only the Jython runtime is supported.
Also: What about release versions of those implementations ?
Jython and IronPython appear to follow the CPython release
versions, but PyPy uses its own version scheme.
The current release of PyPy is 1.6, but it is intended to be compatible
with CPython 2.7. If the classifiers are interpreted how I've
interpreted them above, then combining two or more is sufficient, and
having PyPy :: 1.5, PyPy 1.6, PyPy :: 1.7 doesn't offer much.
However, as usual, interpretation is up in the air, since a classifier
is only a name, with no associated documented meaning, beyond what
people manage to glean from mailing lists or by looking at existing
projects that have decided to use them.
Jean-Paul
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
