'Re: [Distutils] "just use debian"'

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       python-distutils-sig
Subject:    Re: [Distutils] "just use debian"
From:       Dave Peterson <dpeterson () enthought ! com>
Date:       2008-09-30 21:57:15
Message-ID: 48E2A0BB.6090300 () enthought ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]

Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 30 septembre 2008 Ã  15:46 -0500, Dave Peterson a Ã©crit :
>   
>> Josselin Mouette wrote: 
>>     
>>> No, please stop here. That's not OK. If a new version of HardJSON breaks
>>> your application, it is friggin' broken. If that new version is not
>>> compatible, it should be called HardJSON2, and nothing will break.
>>>       
>> I disagree with your assertion that the name HAS to imply API
>> compatibility.   There ought to be something that specifies API / ABI
>> compatibility, such as the combination of name and some portion of a
>> version number,  but too many people depend on a name for marketing or
>> other purposes for us to impose that it indicate technical aspects.
>>     
>
> The marketing name does not have to be the same of the name of the
> module you import. The situation where they differ is even quite common.
>   

But we already have a separation between project name and module names 
that are contained within that project.   We don't currently declare 
dependencies on the module names but on the project name.   i.e. a 
dependency on HardJSON > 2.0 does not say anything about what modules 
you're expecting to import or use, only that you expect to use version 2 
of a project called HardJSON.   Were you suggesting that change?

I think the rest of the comments are easily resolved after the above is 
clear.

-- Dave

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Josselin Mouette wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:1222810334.32659.18.camel@shizuru" type="cite">
  <pre wrap="">Le mardi 30 septembre 2008 à 15:46 -0500, Dave Peterson a écrit :
  </pre>
  <blockquote type="cite">
    <pre wrap="">Josselin Mouette wrote: 
    </pre>
    <blockquote type="cite">
      <pre wrap="">No, please stop here. That’s not OK. If a new version of HardJSON breaks
your application, it is friggin’ broken. If that new version is not
compatible, it should be called HardJSON2, and nothing will break.
      </pre>
    </blockquote>
    <pre wrap="">I disagree with your assertion that the name HAS to imply API
compatibility.   There ought to be something that specifies API / ABI
compatibility, such as the combination of name and some portion of a
version number,  but too many people depend on a name for marketing or
other purposes for us to impose that it indicate technical aspects.
    </pre>
  </blockquote>
  <pre wrap=""><!---->
The marketing name does not have to be the same of the name of the
module you import. The situation where they differ is even quite common.
  </pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
But we already have a separation between project name and module names
that are contained within that project.   We don't currently declare
dependencies on the module names but on the project name.   i.e. a
dependency on HardJSON &gt; 2.0 does not say anything about what
modules you're expecting to import or use, only that you expect to use
version 2 of a project called HardJSON.   Were you suggesting that
change?<br>
<br>
I think the rest of the comments are easily resolved after the above is
clear.<br>
<br>
<br>
-- Dave<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>

_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 