2010/9/18 "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de>: >> So, I don't understand what is the benefit here, since a serious >> installer will re-run egg_info every time. > > I think the main applications that people are after are not builds. > They want the dependency information without downloading the packages, > and dependency information for packages they have no plans to install.
Yes they want to build the graph of dependencies, which will be potentially false, as I explained. > > In the specific case of tl.eggdeps, the dependency information is only > used to create printable graphs. If this turns out to be slightly incorrect, > people would notice if they try to use the packages in > question. So you are fine with publishing "slightly incorrect" metadata at PyPI ? I am not. > >> Coming from the Plone/buildout community, I would be concerned if >> buildout would rely on this. json, ldap, mysql you name it --I have >> tons of other examples-- all those dependencies will not be accurate >> unless you re-run setup.py egg_info. "Good enough metadata" sounds >> completely wrong to me. > > Still, people ask for it. I'm fine with telling them that the data > is flawed for various reasons. I object to denying them the data, > and I really dislike having to discard the patch that I already > wrote to implement it. The can have those data, by downloading the tarball of the project and running the egg_info command. They will in this case have accurate data in fact. So right now you don't deny them the data, it's one command away from them. I don't understand the rational behind providing flawed data at PyPI. I am -1 on that. Regards Tarek > > Regards, > Martin > -- Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org _______________________________________________ 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
