On 14 July 2016 at 05:04, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 13 July 2016 at 19:08, Dima Tisnek <dim...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I'd rather see something similar to Linux distributions where there's >> a curated repository "core" and a few semi-official, like "extra" and >> "community," and for some, "testing." >> A name foobar resolves to core/foobar-<latest> if that exists, and if >> not some subset of other repositories is used. >> This way, an outdated package can be moved to another repo without >> breaking install base. >> >> In fact, curation without namespaces will already be pretty good. > > Who would take on the work of maintaining a curated repository? To do > anything like a reasonable job would be a *lot* of work.
Work that Linux distros already do, hence ideas like https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Env_and_Stacks/Projects/LanguageSpecificRepositories and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Env_and_Stacks/Projects/PackageReviewProcessRedesign Convincing Linux distros to change their review processes to be less precious about package formats is a long political battle to fight, but it's more sustainable in the long run than trying to build *new* curation focused communities for each different language ecosystem that pops up :) Cheers, Nick. P.S. The conda community would be another example of a collaborative project curation effort, albeit one closer to the traditional Linux distro model (where review is accompanied by a change in packaging format) -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
