On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Vinay Sajip <[email protected]> wrote: > Donald Stufft <donald <at> stufft.io> writes: > > >> > released distlib is treated as 2.0, whereas for pip I had to change it to >> > 1.3. >> >> This part worries me. I don't think should maintain any patches for things > inside of pip.vendor. > > Well, the pip test data includes some distributions which include the > post-1.2 metadata fields and have a metadata version of "1.3". The upstream > distlib version is 2.0 (though the format is still key-value, pending > changes to PEP 426). My aim was to limit changes to pip to just > pkg_resources -> pip.vendor.distlib.pkg_resources. Without my renaming "2.0" > to "1.3", some of the pip tests fail because Metadata version 1.3 is > unrecognised. > > Note that pip.vendor.distlib.pkg_resources is a custom shim module to cover > pip's use of pkg_resources - it's not a generic replacement for > pkg_resources (because I am only currently interested in supplanting use of > pkg_resources by pip, and not in a wider sphere). Thus it is not part of > upstream distlib (of course, it could be moved to somewhere else in the pip > package hierarchy). > > Regards, > > Vinay Sajip
Metadata 2.0 was Metadata 1.3 for a time of course. The document specifies "warn only when (minor) version is not recognized" though technically that is not a thing for the 1.x series. The pkg_resources included in Ubuntu 13.04 understands the killed key/value Metadata-2.0-with-requirements. _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
