[Catalog-sig] PEP 314: latest draft
Andrew Kuchling
akuchlin@mems-exchange.org
Wed, 7 May 2003 10:49:07 -0400
--fUYQa+Pmc3FrFX/N
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 08:07:37AM +1000, Richard Jones wrote:
>I've had instances where users have included the entirety of their license=
in=20
>the license field. The question is whether that's appropriate. I also vote=
=20
Not according to PEP 241: "License: A string selected from a short
list of choices, specifying the license covering the package."
>I believe we should ask for adherence to the ReST format here. Simple=20
>paragraphs for most descriptions and use of ReST formatting if you want to=
=20
>get fancy. At the moment I'm <pre> formatting the description in PyPI beca=
use=20
>I don't know whether I can trust the input data.
Is it OK to begin building a dependency on ReST into the Python core?=20
Maybe I'll bring this up on python-dev.
>Download URL?
Proposed text:
Download-URL
=20
A string containing the URL from which this version of the package=20
can be downloaded. (This means that the URL can't be something like
".../package-latest.tgz", but instead must be "../package-0.45.tgz".)
>> A string containing at a minimum the author's name. Contact
>> information can also be added, separating each line with
>> newlines.
>
>PyPI will have to be modified to handle this spec :)
Hm... that seems doubtful, and I've never seen it used. I've removed=20
the mention of separating each line.
--amk (www.amk.ca)
Prying curiosity means death.
-- H.P. Lovecraft, "The Rats in the Walls"
--fUYQa+Pmc3FrFX/N
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE+uRzjkTvcXou9d/ARAiAYAJ9HFGXpXUlcQPYi7gEYr+kE1XqPvACdENAf
cphnCIFzKor8h1cJ9L7eDBY=
=5Nk2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--fUYQa+Pmc3FrFX/N--