On 2 October 2015 at 12:58, Donald Stufft <[email protected]> wrote: > The first thing that immediately stood out to me, is that it's recommending > that downstream redistributors like Debian, Fedora, etc utilize Wheels > instead > of the sdist to build their packages from. However, that is not really > going to > fly with most (all?) of the downstream redistributors. >
I can't now find that it in the draft text, but I don't think this is a problem. This proposal means there's a standardised way to turn a source tree into wheels. So downstream distributors can download an sdist - or even a tarball of a VCS tag, if they're being strict about it - build wheels from that using the config in this proposal, and then transform the wheels into their own package format. > Longer term, I think the answer is sdist 2.0 which has proper metadata inside of it (name, version, dependencies, etc) but which also includes a hook like this PEP has to specify the build system I hadn't heard of this before - is it something that's being worked on? Thanks, Thomas
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
