Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mardi 30 septembre 2008 à 15:46 -0500, Dave Peterson a écrit :
Josselin Mouette wrote:
No, please stop here. That’s not OK. If a new version of HardJSON breaks
your application, it is friggin’ broken. If that new version is not
compatible, it should be called HardJSON2, and nothing will break.
I disagree with your assertion that the name HAS to imply API
compatibility. There ought to be something that specifies API / ABI
compatibility, such as the combination of name and some portion of a
version number, but too many people depend on a name for marketing or
other purposes for us to impose that it indicate technical aspects.
The marketing name does not have to be the same of the name of the
module you import. The situation where they differ is even quite common.
But we already have a separation between project name and module names
that are contained within that project. We don't currently declare
dependencies on the module names but on the project name. i.e. a
dependency on HardJSON > 2.0 does not say anything about what modules
you're expecting to import or use, only that you expect to use version 2
of a project called HardJSON. Were you suggesting that change?
I think the rest of the comments are easily resolved after the above is
clear.
-- Dave
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
