)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":4146,"name":"Clark Boylan","email":"cboylan@sapwetik.org","username":"cboylan"},"change_message_id":"788f180050ee0ff6218dda6627f35dcbe180bc7b","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"4a20f702_b4dac06c","updated":"2023-11-01 15:10:55.000000000","message":"\u003e At a minimum, we\u0027re going to have to do some sort of dance to exclude PEP 660 support on Python 2.7 and 3.6 due to needing a newer SetupTools than supports them (though the 2.7 tests are actually choking on a syntax error when trying to use importlib_resources). We could still break PEP 517 testing out separate for those, I suppose, though I don\u0027t know that it\u0027s worth it.\n\nIn this case we just need to avoid triggering those code paths under the old python versions that don\u0027t have setuptools new enough for them. It shouldn\u0027t error until we try to execute build_meta.foo() when foo() isn\u0027t present. It looks like that is what has been done here so I think this is fine as is.\n\nEither way our testing of the build_meta integration should be sufficient coverage to know if this is the case.","commit_id":"bb4bbf5f4ac8850658c0e608996193db7ed4be29"}]}