Create a discussion on versioning - #1455
Conversation
Move content on versioning schemes from distributing-packages-using-setuptools.rst to a new discussion on versioning, and update it.
|
Looks good, thanks! Probably mention a few projects that comply with the different versioning systems? |
|
@jeanas the first round of review complete. |
Good idea; done. (I've used Sphinx, NumPy and pip.) |
|
Thanks for the detailed comments! I've revised much of the page, please take another look. |
|
Could you add an own paragraph for ZeroVer? |
It's a satire, not a serious thing :) |
|
I know, it would be to warn users. Maybe that's stupid. |
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
|
@sinoroc Sorry, I don't understand your comment at all. What “things” are less clear-cut in the new document? |
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
That's literally the story of the Python Packaging in the nutshell 😂 |
|
I think adding a 0ver remark might be fun, just don't pass judgement.. |
I think the only unresolved issue right now is #1455 (comment) |
|
@jeanas I stumbled upon an article by Seth. Maybe it could be linked from somewhere too: https://sethmlarson.dev/pep-440. |
Co-authored-by: Sviatoslav Sydorenko (Святослав Сидоренко) <wk.cvs.github@sydorenko.org.ua>
|
@webknjaz I've addressed the latest review. |
Move content on versioning schemes from
distributing-packages-using-setuptools.rst to a new discussion on versioning, and update it.
This is the continuation of #1450.
📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://python-packaging-user-guide--1455.org.readthedocs.build/en/1455/discussions/versioning/