Home Original page

[Python-Dev] Keyword meanings [was: Accept just PEP-0426]

PJ Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Thu Dec 6 01:18:15 CET 2012 
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Daniel Holth <dholth at gmail.com> wrote:
> My desire is to invent the useful "wheel" binary package format in a
> reasonable and limited amount of time by making changes to Metadata 1.2 and
> implementing the new metadata format and wheel in distribute and pip. Help
> me out by allowing useless but un-changed fields to remain in this version
> of the PEP. I am done with the PEP and submit that it is not worse than its
> predecessor.

You could just mark those fields as deprecated and that they should
not be used to delete packages or block packages from installation.

Justification: nobody has managed to make them work in an automated
tool yet, and their use in same is controversial, so they are
downgraded to human-informational only.

Please, let's not have yet *another* metadata spec that advertises
these attractive nuisance[1] fields.  I do not want us to be having
this same conversation AGAIN the next time any metadata changes are
being considered.  We've already had it too many times already.  PEPs
are supposed to summarize these discussions for that very reason.

---
[1] For non-native speakers, an attractive nuisance is a dangerous
thing that entices unsuspecting persons to play with it;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attractive_nuisance_doctrine has more
details.
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list