On Jun 2, 2013, at 6:51 AM, mar...@v.loewis.de wrote: > > Quoting Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com>: > >> I'm -1 on anything that doesn't involve at least a minimal level of human >> involvement (possibly excepting an initial clean up exercise for projects >> with no author email) > > I support this position. This is actually how PyPI has operated over the last > decade. People have always taken over projects, either the project entirely, > or just the name. It always involved contacting the original owner of the > name. > > In this thread, Lukas wrote > >> Fortunately we were able to work it out with Richard >> but we had to contact him directly and waste his cycles on this. > > I don't consider his cycles wasted at all. It's an important interaction. > > I'm fine with formalizing the process, and I'm also fine with adding tool > support. However, I agree that a PEP should be written and agreed about this. > > Personally, I'd favor this procedure: > - nothing happens unless some user explicitly requests it > - on request, the owner is contacted, and given some time to respond > - if they do respond, and are unwilling to yield the name, nothing > happens > - if they have confirmed that they want to keep the name, they won't > be asked again for at least one year.
The missing case here is what happens if they don't respond? > > Regards, > Martin > > > > _______________________________________________ > Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig ----------------- Donald Stufft PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
