On Jul 13, 2007, at 4:04 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: >>> A number of issues should be considered, of course: >>> - there should be a way to get authoritative answers somehow, >>> preferably >>> from mirrors, but, if necessary, from the main site >> >> I don't know what you mean. I envision mirrors as being read-only >> and >> only used by setuptools. The main site would certainly be >> authoritative. > > The problem is with outdated information. With a mirror, the question > is always "is my information current". Perhaps it's ok for users of > a mirror to use outdated information. However, when people register > a package, then use setuptools to install it, they might be puzzled > that it won't find the package just because it was using an outdated > mirror.
I agree 100% with this concern, which is why I was skeptical of caching in the classical form. Right. So the question is, how can we keep the mirror up to date? :) >> Yup. This might be a really nice way to go. It would be especially >> nice >> if a client could contact PyPI and ask for new data since a given >> time. >> I imagine that this request could be as cheap as the requests we have >> now, unless a client was very out of date. > > PyPI already supports that: the updated_releases RPC call will return > all packages that have changed since a given date. Awesome! Too bad it wasn't shown in: http://wiki.python.org/moin/CheeseShopXmlRpc I'll look at the source (location hints welcome) and update that page. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714 http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org _______________________________________________ Catalog-SIG mailing list Catalog-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
