On Wed, 2011-12-21 at 22:01 -0600, Steve Schmechel wrote: > Just curious, did the idea of separate indexes for current and > development versions go away? > I remember: > bin/easy_install -i http://dist.repoze.org/bfg/current/simple \ > repoze.bfg > Was it too hard to manage the private indexes?
Yes. And no one really remembered to use them anyway. And when they did, they complained that those indices didn't have everything PyPI had in them. None of the install tools allow you to use more than one index for everything. > Pyramid has separate documentation for version 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, and > 1.3. > But if you follow any of them you end up running latest code due to > this step in every version: > $ bin/easy_install pyramid Yup. > I guess this happened in old BFG documentation as well, since > old versions > were not updated updated to use a "maintenance index" after a new > version was released. However, there was a separation between current > and > development indexes. > > > Maybe Pyramid is more stable now and a separate development index > is not worth the effort. (And the documentation is accurate right out > of > the gate, which is extraordinary.) Most people when hit with their first "oh shit, PyPI changed" moment learn to pin requirements. And they learn to adjust docs based on the way they do that. Additionally, most people who haven't run into this are almost always wanting to install the latest version anyway, so it generally works out. Legislating all this is too much work. - C -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en.
