Kevin Dangoor wrote: > On 11/1/05, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Kevin Dangoor wrote: > > > I fixed the Mac eggs... but, won't anyone on Linux run into this > > > problem? If they easy_install and it picks up the source zip, will the > > > version number come from the zip name or will it come from the setup > > > file? > > > > >From the setup file. It'd probably be a "best practice" for code > > that's "in development" in Subversion to have a setup.cfg that sets the > > right egg_info flags. Then, I suppose when you branch for a release > > you can take those options out of the release branch. That way, if you > > develop on the trunk, then a trunk checkout will always be properly > > tagged with the version. > > But this still means that source distributions like the ones at > http://peak.telecommunity.com/snapshots will have the version skew > issue if someone actually installs it.
Not exactly. '0.5a0dev' is a *lower* version number than '0.5a0dev-r123', so this doesn't result in any breakage. It does make me think, however, that 'sdist' should maybe somehow stick the subversion revision into the source distribution, but only if your setup.cfg specifies that you're doing subversion tags. Interestingly, the source distribution's PKG-INFO will already contain this information... Hm. Maybe what I could do is have the egg_info command check for a PKG-INFO in the setup directory, and then read the version info from there if there's no .svn directory to read it from. That way, source distributions would automatically keep the subversion revision tag they were built with. I'll definitely look into this, as it would completely close this particular loophole.
