Add support for iOS and Android platform tags.

[freakboy3742]

Adds support for PEP 730 iOS tags, and PEP 738 Android tags.

Fixes #17549
Fixes #17557
Closes #17556

[freakboy3742]

FYI @mhsmith

[di]

I think the PEP 738 bits here are blocked as noted in #17556.

But if you would like to ship the PEP 730 part separately, the specification in the PEP seems sufficient and I'd be ok merging that today.

Although this seems to be missing the minimum iOS version?

[freakboy3742]

I think the PEP 738 bits here are blocked as noted in #17556.

I've submitted pypa/packaging.python.org#1804 to address that requirement.

But if you would like to ship the PEP 730 part separately, the specification in the PEP seems sufficient and I'd be ok merging that today.

Although this seems to be missing the minimum iOS version?

As noted in this comment about Android, while Python sets a default minimum iOS version (13.0 at present), it's possible to use older versions. iOS 12.0 is known to work with some compile-time warnings. I haven't tested older versions, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn older iOS versions (back to 8.0, when support for dynamic linking was added) could be made to work.

On that basis, I figured it wasn't worth adding an explicit version check, as there's nothing that fundamentally prevents older versions from working if you've gone to the trouble of compiling Python with an earlier minimum iOS version. However, I'm happy to add a minimum version check (12.0 would be a reasonable bound based on the wording of the PEP) if you feel it is required.

[di]

I've submitted pypa/packaging.python.org#1804 to address that requirement.

Thanks! I added a review there.

On that basis, I figured it wasn't worth adding an explicit version check, as there's nothing that fundamentally prevents older versions from working if you've gone to the trouble of compiling Python with an earlier minimum iOS version. However, I'm happy to add a minimum version check (12.0 would be a reasonable bound based on the wording of the PEP) if you feel it is required.

Got it, I think I misread https://peps.python.org/pep-0730/#packaging which is just providing "12.0" as an example and not an actual minimum. I'm OK with not including a minimum but I think we need to specify what we consider valid values for these fields just a little more (as I noted in my review of the update to the guide).

[mhsmith]

I'm OK with not including a minimum

I agree with not including a minimum, for the reasons given here.

[freakboy3742]

@di pypa/packaging.python.org#1804 has now been merged; was that the only remaining blocker on merging this?