On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Chris McDonough <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 01:50 -0400, Daniel Holth wrote: >> I propose mapping a typical entry_points.txt to Metadata 1.3 like so: >> >> [pyramid.scaffold] >> starter=pyramid.scaffolds:StarterProjectTemplate >> zodb=pyramid.scaffolds:ZODBProjectTemplate >> alchemy=pyramid.scaffolds:AlchemyProjectTemplate >> [console_scripts] >> bfg2pyramid = pyramid.fixers.fix_bfg_imports:main >> pcreate = pyramid.scripts.pcreate:main >> pserve = pyramid.scripts.pserve:main >> pshell = pyramid.scripts.pshell:main >> proutes = pyramid.scripts.proutes:main >> pviews = pyramid.scripts.pviews:main >> ptweens = pyramid.scripts.ptweens:main >> prequest = pyramid.scripts.prequest:main >> [paste.server_runner] >> wsgiref = pyramid.scripts.pserve:wsgiref_server_runner >> cherrypy = pyramid.scripts.pserve:cherrypy_server_runner >> >> >> Extension: Entry-Point >> Entry-Point/pyramid.scaffold: >> starter=pyramid.scaffolds:StarterProjectTemplate >> Entry-Point/paste.server_runner: wsgiref = >> pyramid.scripts.pserve:wsgiref_server_runner > > I see nothing wrong with this as long as it's understood that individual > "Entry-Point/foo" lines can be multiple use. The spec only indicates > that the "Entry-Point" moniker itself is multiple use.
Of course. It would be a dumb translation of the old file, with the same semantics. Alternatively it could just mention the [sections] and keep entry-points.txt I don't suppose there is any meaningful performance difference either way. I think we will have to parse every METADATA most of the time any packaging queries are made with this system. _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
