On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: > > On May 15, 2013, at 3:22 PM, Daniel Holth <dho...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: >>> >>> On May 15, 2013, at 2:10 PM, Daniel Holth <dho...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: >>>>> It also has a problem with setuptools, distribute, and PyPI and the way >>>>> they do normalization. They all already assume that projects will >>>>> generally have alpha numeric names and you can take any non alpha numeric >>>>> string of characters and replace it with a "-". So in order to properly >>>>> support unicode you'd have to remove all the existing versions of >>>>> setuptools from production use, and you'd need to update PyPI to >>>>> understand how to lower case unicode. >>>>> >>>>> Because I registered The snowman package, you'll find it's impossible to >>>>> register any other pure unicode package of any length. >>>> >>>> If PyPI has a proper i18n and Unicode implementation first, and then >>>> the tools are updated (perhaps distlib is an easier place to add >>>> Unicode than setuptools), then pypi will contain: >>>> >>>> 1. mostly ASCII projects that everyone can install >>>> >>>> 2. some Unicode projects uploaded by jerks >>>> >>>> 3. some worthwhile Unicode-named projects that might not have been >>>> uploaded before >>>> >>>> 4. some Unicode-named packages that you have to use even though you >>>> don't like the name? >>>> >>>> It's true that for a long time ASCII project names will be more >>>> convenient no matter what PyPI does, but it can be the publisher's >>>> choice rather than being cut off at the head. I don't think it's a >>>> tremendous amount of work to make Unicode work properly just for those >>>> who want it. >>> >>> The problem here isn't just that the old systems won't support it. It's >>> that they both won't support it and if someone does attempt to use a >>> unicode package they can get an entirely different package then they >>> expected to get. The failure case is a massive security risk. >> >> Don't expose them in the simple API? > > So then they are useless? It seems a lot of gotchas and gymnastics just to be > academically nicer to people whose languages don't fit into ascii alpha > numerics but it's only a superficial nicer since they won't actually be able > to do anything useful with it.
Not immediately. I agree with you in principle, but suggest you do something much more difficult than your original proposal by having a long-term plan for allowing Unicode in all the places while still providing for visually distinguishable names. Is anyone reading this list not an English-speaking male? Who writes malicious tutorials anyway? Wouldn't they just ask you to install a package directly from revision control? ಠ_ಠ _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
