On 03/06/2013 03:43, Noah Kantrowitz wrote:
Some people are saying "files uploaded" vs. "downloadable packages".
I don't like the "files uploaded" criterion because IMO it's a
perfectly valid use case to list a package on PyPI which is only
available via external revision control.
Sorry, if you haven't had time to follow lately we have already begun
deprecating this system.
I hope you're misunderstanding what pje is saying; this isn't about
hosting distributions elsewhere, this is about having a PyPI listing for
a project that is under development but it hasn't got to the point where
it's sensible for a release to be made.
Heck, a project that only has planning documents and a reasonably
active mailing list should still qualify for PyPI listing, else the
original distutils-sig would not have qualified for reserving the name
"distutils" on PyPI, before its first release. ;-)
If a reasonably active project doesn't have anything to show after six months,
I think we have different definitions of 'reasonably active'.
...or different definitions of 'software quality' ;-)
Seriously, I don't think anyone would argue that we have enough nested
list printers in this world or that a package without any contact
details or description is fair game to delete, but I must echo what
others have said in that a unilateral process where a project is deleted
without the owner being given a reasonable time to respond doesn't seem
like a good idea.
cheers,
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
