On 2 March 2014 15:22, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27 February 2014 10:46, Marcus Smith <qwc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> that would be good. If you did, I would link to the tasks from the PUG >> future page. > > OK, these are the things I consider blockers for an accepted metadata 2.0 > spec: > > https://bitbucket.org/pypa/pypi-metadata-formats/issues?priority=blocker&status=open&status=new > > Finalising PEP 426/440/459 is on me. At this point, I think that > consists of *taking away* things that aren't yet settled (specifically > metadata hooks), so we can see how far this next iteration actually > gets us before trying to solve the remaining problems that need some > kind of trigger support. > > A required preliminary task is to create a revision of PEP 425 that > expands its scope to also handle the parts of the file/directory > naming scheme that are common across sdist, wheel and the installation > database (with compatibility tags becoming a subsection), as well as > fixing the definition of the compatibility tags to better handle > Windows and Python 2.x binary extensions. (There's a separate > non-blocker issue for better Linux/POSIX support - building from > source is far more common there, and both conda and Linux distro > packages remain available as a near-term workaround for the lack of > upstream binary packages) > > The other blockers are then sdist 2.0, wheel 1.1 and a second revision > of the installation database format.
Just remembered two more blockers - updating the JSON schema files to account for the switch to making heavy use of schema extensions and rerunning the PyPI compatibility analysis. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
