After the discussions, we've had on the catalog sig, I have updated
the proposal to include comments and clarifications regarding the setup
and it's relationship to the mirror PEP (see the end of the proposal).
While I don't think that the proposal has an influence on whether
or when PEP 381 gets
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 4:39 PM, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
[..]
Competing with PEP 381
--
A few PEP 381 developers have stated that this proposal would limit
the interest in PEP 381 implementations and argue that the proposal
would compete with their proposed
A few notes:
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 9:39 AM, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
In order to maintain its credibility as software repository, to
support the many different projects relying on the PyPI infrastructure
and the many users who rely on the simplified installation process
enabled
* Move the PyPI installation to mod_wsgi (I believe it is using FCGI
now?)
For the latter: correct.
For the former (use mod_wsgi): I had actually implemented it, but needed
to revert to FCGI, because mod_wsgi would cause too many hanging servers.
This is largely work that would have to
I'm surprised, what specific mod_wsgi configuration did you try?
Not sure I understand the question:
WSGIDaemonProcess pypi display-name=wsgi-pypi processes=10 threads=1
maximum-requests=2000
WSGIProcessGroup pypi
WSGIPassAuthorization On
WSGIScriptAlias /pypi /data/pypi/src/pypi/pypi.wsgi
