RetroSearch Browse

Mon Dec 28 10:11:32 CET 2009 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-December/094684.html

On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 6:16 AM, Tres Seaver <tseaver at palladion.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Terry Reedy wrote:
>> On 12/27/2009 7:48 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>>> Tarek Ziadé<ziade.tarek<at>  gmail.com>  writes:
>>>> This was ambiguous because it was unclear, as MvL stated,  if "2.5"
>>>> was just "2.5.0" or included
>>>> versions like "2.5.1" or "2.5.2".
>>> How about having "2.5" match all 2.5.x versions, and "2.5.0" match only 2.5
>>> itself? (ditto for "2.5.N" matching only 2.5.N for N>= 1)
>>
>> If the first x.y release were called x.y.0, (does not sys.version
>> include 0?) then x.y would unambiguously mean the series.
>
> This syntax is not just for the 'Requires-Python:' field, but also for
> the 'Requires-Dist:' and 'Obsoletes-Dist:' fields:  not all third-party
> packages call the first release of a given series .0.

They do start with "2.5" *or* "2.5.0" for their first release of the
2.5 series. And both are equal for PEP 386. IOW "2.5 == 2.5.0",
always.

So it doesn't really matter if some projects don't use the terminal 0
here. Antoine's proposal still works.

Tarek

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-December/094684.html below:

Metadata for Python Software Packages 1.2