On Oct 28, 2015 3:25 AM, "Nick Coghlan" <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > [...] > From an sdist metadata perspective, though, I think the right thing to do is to descope PEP 426 to just the stuff we *need* for the build system improvements, and defer everything else (e.g. JSON-LD, SPDX, richer dependency semantics, etc) to a future metadata 3.0 proposal (or potentially metadata extensions, or 2.x format updates).
I think PEP 426 is actually orthogonal to these proposals. AFAICT, the only reason Robert's PEP as written requires PEP 426 is that he needs a standard serializable format to list dependencies... but he actually defines such a format about 10 lines above for the static bootstrap-requirements key, i.e. a list of specifier strings. So it actually makes more sense to use that for dynamic requirements too for internal consistency, and leave PEP 426 out of it. -n
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
