[Catalog-sig] PEP 314: latest draft

[Andrew Kuchling]

--V0207lvV8h4k8FAm
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 05:14:05PM -0700, Kevin Turner wrote:
>Since License is not optional, it might be good to retain it explicitly
>in the interface.  Otherwise you either end up distributing packages

Not optional within the PKG-INFO data format, but it can be omitted in
a setup.py in which case the License field will just get 'UNKNOWN'.

>of Classifiers for required elements.  The documentation for Classifiers
>becomes more complicated as well, "multiple use but must include at
>least one of ..."

True.  On the other hand, I don't know if PyPI looks at the license
field and treats it as equivalent to "License :: whatever" so that
searches by license work.  (Similar question for Platform...)

To my mind, having both classifiers and separate fields violates TOOWTDI.

--amk                                                    (www.amk.ca)
Grinding oppression of the masses is the only policy that pays dividends.
      -- The Collector, in "The Sunmakers"


--V0207lvV8h4k8FAm
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+uR/okTvcXou9d/ARAv5YAJ9vunwYnFltAzQENmEUYW/LJS4mQgCglVLr
VxF4NPyz1fDHls5U0u1wI6s=
=Enfn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--V0207lvV8h4k8FAm--