> On Feb 4, 2015, at 4:32 PM, Stefano Rivera <stefa...@debian.org> wrote: > > Hi Donald (2015.02.04_22:06:25_+0200) >>> On 4 February 2015 at 06:08, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: >>>> If it gets implemented it'll live at /uscan/ because it exists primarily to >>>> work around the deficiencies that exist in uscan (Particularly the >>>> dificulty >>>> in ignoring url fragments). > > Would it be that hard to have fake directory listings on /simple/? > I mean, surely keeping compatibility there is simpler than having a > second endpoint just for Debian.
All the data that uscan needs is already on /simple/, you can make uscan work with it. There is one major problem and one small problem: 1. Major: The /simple/ URLs all have a #md5=<hash> and it’s non trivial to write a d/watch file that ignores them and uscan doesn’t by default. You can do it but it’s ugly and prone to copy/paste bugs. 2. The URLs on /simple/ point to /packages/, so it requires the 2 arg form of d/watch instead of the single arg form. So you can make uscan work right now with /simple/ (and a few people have) but #1 means that a few of the #debian-python people were not very happy with that solution. I can’t remove/modify that hash without causing issues with pip/easy_install though. Originally I was going to just make a /uscan/ that was /simple/ without the hash, but instead I suggested to #debian-python that a redirector might be better and there is now one at pypi.debian.net. > >> We talked about this in #debian-python and there was concern that a new >> version >> of uscan wouldn’t be in Jessie and then wouldn’t cover the people who need it >> the most. > > Who needs it the most? We could fix it in unstable and backports. The > DEHS data on tracker.debian.org comes from quantz.debian.org. which is > currently using devscripts from back ports. No idea, I’m just repeating what folks said in #debian-python, I have no idea who runs uscan and on what platforms. Between fixing uscan and having a redirector I don’t have an opinion since neither one of those have an impact on what PyPI does. > > >> I don’t know if that’s true or not but I certainly think that uscan _should_ >> ignore anything that comes after a # (similarly to how it ignores anything >> that >> comes after a ?). > > Agreed. > > SR > > -- > Stefano Rivera > http://tumbleweed.org.za/ > +1 415 683 3272 > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org > Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150204213208.ga3...@bach.rivera.co.za > --- Donald Stufft PGP: 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/c118b6b9-f56e-46be-9a80-c5e934c1f...@stufft.io