Document the long-term vision for twine

I’m working through the Python Packaging User Guide and getting ready to create and upload my first Python package. 👏

Towards the end of the guide we learn that we need to upload our distribution, and twine is the recommended tool for doing that.

It seems awkward that we do everything with setuptools except upload the distribution, which we do with twine.

The divide raises a few questions:

• What is the long-term vision for twine?
• Will it somehow be merged in to setuptools and become python setup.py upload?
• Is it meant to co-exist with setuptools for the long-term?

[ncoghlan]

https://github.com/pypa/packaging-problems/issues/60 covers the discussion for how to improve the publication UX in general.

While we still recommend it on packaging.python.org, twine is actually less essential when using recent versions of setuptools and distutils, since the original lack of HTTPS certificate validation that twine addressed has also been addressed in the upload commands (the main problems now are with older Linux distros that are still shipping without enforced use of HTTPS and without default certificate validation in place).

[annaraven]

Do we want to add this to the README? Maybe a “future” or “roadmap” section?