> On Jan 29, 2019, at 9:48 AM, Xavier Fernandez <xav.fernan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I disagree that it *needs* the name: since the link is declared as a
> dependency, the installer will necessarily need to check/download it at some
> point to install it and could discover the package name at that point, just
> like it will discover the version at the same point.
> Providing the name in the direct reference is an optimization that ease the
> work of the installer and allowing to provide a version specifier could be an
> other one.
>
It needs the name to do that without downloading, which is ideally the
direction we’re heading towards, that we can do as much work prior to
downloading files as possible.
A version specifier is something like “>=10”. It doesn’t make any sense to say
“I depend explicitly on the version of foo that exists at this URL, and also
that URL has to be >= 10”. You’re already telling us that you depend on that
URL, the version specifier is completely nonsensical. But lifting the *version*
(as opposed to a version specifier) that is expected to be at that URL into the
dependency declaration is fine, it’s just baking more information into the
specifier to make it easier to handle.
--
Distutils-SIG mailing list -- distutils-sig@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to distutils-sig-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/distutils-sig.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/distutils-sig@python.org/message/Y46FNL3GGDTCQCXFROPR7QX2TEENKHCA/
