On 1 February 2018 at 10:01, Mark Williams <m...@enotuniq.org> wrote:
> Hi everyone!
> The manylinux1 platform tag has been tremendously useful, but unfortunately 
> it's showing its age:
> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2017-April/030360.html
> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/wheel-builders/2016-December/000239.html
> Nathaniel identified a list of things to do for its successor, manylinux2:
> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2017-April/030361.html
> Please find below a draft PEP for manylinux2 that attempts to address these 
> issues.

Thanks for this!

Something we've discussed in the past is switching manylinux over to a
variant of CalVer, where the manylinux version number inherently
conveys the era of operating system compatibility that each variant is
targeting. In the case of this PEP, that would be `manylinux2010`,
since the RHEL/CentOS 6 ABI was formally set with the release of RHEL
6 in November 2010.

The intended benefit of that is that it would allow folks to go ahead
and propose newer manylinux variants that allow for ppc64le and
aarch64 support as needed, without having to guess where those
definitions should come in a sequential series.

Would a manylinux2 -> manylinux2010 version numbering switch
significantly complicate implementation of the PEP?


Nick Coghlan   |   ncogh...@gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org

Reply via email to