On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 18:52:46 -0400, Donald Stufft wrote: > On Jun 30, 2013, at 6:51 PM, Gabriel de Perthuis <g2p.c...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 18:46:51 -0400, Donald Stufft wrote: >>> On Jun 30, 2013, at 6:39 PM, Gabriel de Perthuis <g2p.c...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> So it would prefer that dev and test be extras with well known names, >>>> so that dev, test, and any other extras define dependencies with a >>>> minimum of ambiguity and without the need for a second level of >>>> qualifiers. >>> >>> "Well known names" is way more ambiguous than a top level field. >>> It's easy to have minor variances across various packages, "test" vs >>> "tests", "docs", "doc", "documentation". Both top level and "kind" >>> share the fact that there is a limited number of allowed names, >>> which makes it simple to validate that the same name is being used >>> everywhere (because anything outside of those limited numbers are >>> rejected). >> >> These well-known names would also have some tool support. >> Something like `pip install-dev` would be sufficient. >> > But when defining them, it's very easy to accidentally use "tests" > instead of "test".
A lint tool can warn about these names, and a PyPI server could even block them for new-style packages. _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
