On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: > > On Oct 29, 2014, at 7:57 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 30 Oct 2014 07:20, "Marcus Smith" <qwc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> yes, I'm partial to a solution like this prior to wheel 2.0 (that I >> imagine would support additional/custom tags) > > +1 for being able to add additional custom platform tags in the file naming > convention from me as well. As Marcus noted earlier, even if you set up > distro specific indexes currently, there's nothing built into the tooling to > keep you from trying to install (e.g.) a Fedora 21 wheel on RHEL or CentOS 5 > (which is highly unlikely to work, given that the core ABIs in RHEL/CentOS 5 > are 7 or 8 years old at this point). > > We'd be highly unlikely to flip the switch from "experimental service, use > at your own risk" to "fully supported Fedora feature" while that's still the > case. > > With arbitrary platform tags, we could inject that into the wheel filenames > as part of the build process, and then again when invoking pip. > > That opens things up for us to figure out how to best flag compatibility on > the distro side, without committing to a specific approach upstream (not > yet, anyway). > > An alternative approach would be to add an "additional wheel suffix" setting > for pip that allowed us to have names with endings like ".fc21.whl" or > ".el7.whl" recognised as valid wheel files. > > I'm not that worried about the exact details though - the main feature I'd > like is the ability to create wheel files that pip will ignore by default, > but will accept if I specifically tell it what to look for. > > > > Do we plan for this to be allowed to upload to PyPI proper? These custom > tags?
No _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
