On Apr 05, 2011, at 01:22 PM, Glenn Linderman wrote:
>On 4/5/2011 11:52 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> DEFAULT_VERSION_RE = re.compile(r'(?P<version>\d+\.\d(?:\.\d+)?)')
>> __version__ = pkgutil.get_distribution('elle').metadata['version']
>
>The RE as given won't match alpha, beta, rc, dev, and post suffixes that are
>discussed in POP 386.It really wasn't intended to. I'm torn about even including this code sample in the PEP. I'm highly tempted to rip this out and hand-wave over the implementation of get_version(). It's not a critical part of the PEP and might just be distracting. >Are there issues for finding and loading multiple versions of the same >module? Out of scope for this PEP I think. >Should it be possible to determine a version before loading a module? If >yes, the version module would have to be able to find a parse version strings >in any of the many places this PEP suggests they could be... so that would be >somewhat complex, but the complexity shouldn't be used to change the >answer... but if the answer is yes, it might encourage fewer variant cases to >be supported for acceptable version definition locations for this PEP. I think the answer can be "yes", but only through distutils2/packaging APIs. If there's no metadata for a module available, then I don't have a problem saying the version information can't be determined without importing it. -Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 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
