In general, +1 to this.
Thanks for your very detailed reply !
In describing this, module name is probably not the best word.
ProjectName or EggName might be better. (Because there can multiple
modules but they are all described by a single name in the egg-info).
Right, I meant EggName (the Name: tag in the egg-info).
Yes, Tarek FTW !! :)
Idea for Provides: +1
Idea for Requires: I think the versioning landscape in python is
crazy right now. I'd leave off versions in Requires altogether until
(hopefully) PEP-386 is implemented and becomes standard.
Agreed, in the light of your explanations, maybe we should leave versions
aside for now. We could only handle simple versions (only numbers and dots),
but that would not solve the problem of backporting fixes or the ... say,
casualness ... with which upstream authors add versionned deps ;-)
Actually, I always had in mind to handle the most common cases and leave the
corner cases for hand-made Requires, so I wholeheartedly agree.
Thanks for your review. I've updated the script in the previous URLs if
you want to have a look at it.
I'm going to open a ticket in RPM's trac instance. If you know of a better
way, of course, I'm interested.
~~~~ Jabber : abompard(a)jabber.fr
"Nous n'héritons pas la Terre de nos ancêtres, nous l'empruntons à nos
enfants." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry