Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> I'll remove it and push it in Distutils documentation, then might just
>> provide a link in the PEP References.
>
> That sounds fine to me.
That would address my questions as well - someone looking for a guide on
how they should deal with different versions of the metada
> I'll remove it and push it in Distutils documentation, then might just
> provide a link in the PEP References.
That sounds fine to me.
Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 10:26 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> David Lyon wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 10:31:09 +0900, "Stephen J. Turnbull"
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Martin's point is that the PEP process doesn't *have* "reference"
>>> implementations. It has *sample* implementations. It may be useful
>
2009/12/23 "Martin v. Löwis" :
>> So that will happen in the code of course, but we need the PEP to state
>> clearly
>> wether metadata 1.0 and 1.1 should be dropped by implementations or not.
>
> Ok. We should recommend that implementations support these versions
> indefinitely. I see no point in
David Lyon wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 10:31:09 +0900, "Stephen J. Turnbull"
> wrote:
>
>> Martin's point is that the PEP process doesn't *have* "reference"
>> implementations. It has *sample* implementations. It may be useful
>> to refer to a sample implementation as an example..
>
> Fair en
> As an application developer, I really stand with Tarek here.
Not sure what specific point of Tarek you are supporting, though.
I think we want something stronger than that since they were not really
used by
the community and removed and replaced by something better. Using them
>>
