On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:29 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de> wrote: > Am 27.08.12 16:56, schrieb Daniel Holth: > >> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Daniel Holth<dho...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I've drafted some edits to Metadata 1.2 with valuable feedback from >> >> ... >>> >>> (full changeset on >>> https://bitbucket.org/dholth/python-peps/changeset/537e83bd4068) >> >> >> Metadata 1.2 is nearly 8 years old and it's Accepted but not Final. Is >> it better to continue editing it, or create a new PEP for Metadata >> 1.3? > > > You can't add new fields to the format after the fact, unless the format had > provided for such additions (which it does not - there is > no mention of custom fields anywhere, and no elaboration on how > "unknown" fields should be processed). > > So if you want to add new fields, you need to create a new version > of the metadata. Prepare for a ten-year period of acceptance - so it > would be good to be sure that no further additions are desired within > the next ten years before seeking approval for the PEP.
I don't know of a tool that doesn't reliably ignore extra fields, but I will put you down as being in favor of an X- fields paragraph: Extensions (X- Fields) :::::::::::::::::::::: Metadata files can contain fields that are not part of the specification, called *extensions*. These fields start with with `X-`. _______________________________________________ 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
