I have no issue moving things to the PyPA, the list was more of a ‘which of these is useful’ check
Dan Ryan gh: @techalchemy // e: d...@danryan.co From: Donald Stufft [mailto:don...@stufft.io] Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2018 8:15 AM To: Dan Ryan Cc: Tzu-ping Chung; Distutils Subject: Re: [Distutils] Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package) On Sep 20, 2018, at 8:12 AM, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: Depending on how vital a particular bit of functionality is to pip, we’re likely going to want most libraries that are pulling functionality out of pip to live under the PyPA banner, and ideally should be setup in a way that existing pip contributors can work on them as well. While conceptually these are becoming distinct entities, for end users they’re going to be part of the nebulous thing that is pip, and changes and for “core” bits, pip wouldn’t want to lose the ability to work on these bits of functionality directly. Quick clarification— That’s not to suggest that any particular one of these libraries need to move under the PyPA banner at this point. Just that as a general rule of thumb, stuff that is core to pip, we’re going to want the above before we would likely accept a PR that switches pip over to using it (again, depending on how “core” it is). -- Distutils-SIG mailing list -- distutils-sig@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to distutils-sig-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mm3/mailman3/lists/distutils-sig.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/mm3/archives/list/distutils-sig@python.org/message/C3F5KCJDKGDENGSMIRENEDQHYXFXRRGU/
