On 07/02/2018 05:21, Alex Walters wrote:
...........
This is a really good point. Since pip is the main interface to packages
for end users anyways, we can call it manylinux8675309 and it wouldn't
really matter to users - the name only really matters to package
maintainers, not users. And because of that, manylinux2010, manylinux2014,
etc makes more sense. A package maintainer is expected to be more educated
about these matters, and that naming scheme is more useful to them. "Whats
the oldest linux system my code will run on?" is a very likely question a
........
I dispute the fact that package maintainers should be more educated about these matters. The package maintainer usually knows
about one or a few packages (in my case reportlab etc). I know very little about the architectures and platforms that people are
using with reportlab today. Nor do I know (or need to know) about multiple linux distributions and what libraries they supported
and in what year.
I do agree that the name of the available packages shouldn't really matter. Provided there is information in the name that allows
the requesting pip to decide on the appropriate package to use (or lack thereof) that should suffice. Is pip clever enough to
decide this or will we have to rely on the mysterious _manylinux module?
--
Robin Becker
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
