On Oct 17, 2013, at 6:50 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> And to me. A general "Evolution of PyPI APIs" process PEP could be a very > helpful thing to avoid having to rehash this discussion for every change :) > PEPapolza > Given that PyPI doesn't have releases as such, perhaps we could tie this to > the feature release cadence of pip? And officially recommend twine as the > upload tool over using distutils directly? (Is twine ready for that at this > point?) > Possibly, but I think it probably makes more sense to just do date based. Individual proposals can include special casings that depend on a release of a piece of tooling if it makes sense for that proposal. > The only other thing I would add is that when previous output is /dev/null'ed > we may want to have a placeholder for a while with a link to an explanation > for the removal. > A placeholder where? On the PyPI UX or something? ----------------- 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 https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
