You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have searched the existing issues (open and closed), and could not find an existing issue
What keywords did you use to search existing issues?
pkginfo
packaging
Please describe the problem you are attempting to solve with this request
I would like to upload packages using metadata version 2.4 to PyPI.
How do you think we should solve this?
Investigating what needs to be done to support metadata 2.4 in twine it is evident that support needs to be added to pkginfo first. However, unless I am missing something, pkginfo is used only to parse metadata files. packaging can be used to do the same, is a pypa project like twine, is what warehouse uses to parse metadata, and has support for metadata 2.4. I am willing to explore what changes code wise would be needed to switch metadata parsing from pkginfo to packaging. However, I would invest the time only if the maintainer thing that this is a valid direction to explore.
Anything else you'd like to mention?
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is there an existing issue for this?
What keywords did you use to search existing issues?
pkginfo
packaging
Please describe the problem you are attempting to solve with this request
I would like to upload packages using metadata version 2.4 to PyPI.
How do you think we should solve this?
Investigating what needs to be done to support metadata 2.4 in
twine
it is evident that support needs to be added topkginfo
first. However, unless I am missing something,pkginfo
is used only to parse metadata files.packaging
can be used to do the same, is a pypa project like twine, is whatwarehouse
uses to parse metadata, and has support for metadata 2.4. I am willing to explore what changes code wise would be needed to switch metadata parsing frompkginfo
topackaging
. However, I would invest the time only if the maintainer thing that this is a valid direction to explore.Anything else you'd like to mention?
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: