No. See above comment. If exposing this information has no value then
don't do it. If it does have value, then we are blessing it - and
therefore blessing it *over* other formats.
No: not *over*. Only over formats that don't get exposed. However,
the PEP 345 data are *already* exposed, via HTML, JSON, XML-RPC.
So they are much more prominently presented than what I'm proposing
to do. I fail to see why just extracting the egg-info would be
exposing it *over* the PEP 345 data.
The tool in question is tl.eggdepend. It can easily support both kinds
of metadata.
I couldn't find any references "tl.eggdepend" on the web. It is a minor
point though.
Oops, see http://pypi.python.org/pypi/tl.eggdeps
As in exported by PyPI though an API / interface?
Sure. See, for example,
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/pep345demo/json
It's also available through the XML-RPC release_data.
Saying that they *could* is more empty words if
our *actions* promote the use of another format.
But they do. Please stop saying that they might not, when they actually
do (and have been for a while).
It's just that no package is using it (except for pep345demo).
As for a bit: how long exactly?
Distutils2 1a2 will be released in the next few days.
Sure. But when can tools computing dependencies for widely used packages
actually expect that these metadata will be available?
Promoting another format in preference to distutils2 will very much
prolong that.
IT WILL BE NOT IN PREFERENCE TO DISTUTILS2.
Regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
