On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 10:28 PM, Marius Gedminas mar...@pov.lt wrote:
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 02:21:11PM -0700, Chris Jerdonek wrote:
Would this also affect the ability to update the readme information
for a version on PyPI (i.e. the information displayed on the default
home page generated by
On 28.09.2014 23:59, Donald Stufft wrote:
On Sep 28, 2014, at 5:36 PM, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com
mailto:m...@egenix.com wrote:
On 28.09.2014 21:31, Donald Stufft wrote:
Hello All!
I'd like to discuss the idea of moving PyPI to having immutable files. This
would mean that once you
On 29 September 2014 09:46, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
If I understand you correctly, you are essentially suggesting that it
becomes impossible to ever delete anything uploaded to PyPI, i.e.
turning PyPI into a WORM.
My understanding (I'm sure Donald will correct me if I'm wrong) is
On 29.09.2014 00:51, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On 29 Sep 2014 07:37, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
-1.
It does happen that files need to be reuploaded because of a bug
in the release process and how people manage their code is really
*their* business, not that of PyPI.
FWIW, I am getting
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 10:46 +0200, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
On 28.09.2014 23:59, Donald Stufft wrote:
On Sep 28, 2014, at 5:36 PM, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com
mailto:m...@egenix.com wrote:
On 28.09.2014 21:31, Donald Stufft wrote:
Hello All!
I'd like to discuss the idea of
On 29 Sep 2014 18:49, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
You are missing out on cases, where the release process causes files to
be omitted, human errors where packagers forget to apply changes to
e.g. documentation files, version files, change logs, etc., where
packagers want to add
On 29 Sep 2014 19:04, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
Do you seriously want to force package authors to cut a new release
just because a single uploaded distribution file is broken for
some reason and then ask all users who have already installed one
of the non-broken ones to upgrade
On 29 Sep 2014 19:50, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 Sep 2014 19:04, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
Do you seriously want to force package authors to cut a new release
just because a single uploaded distribution file is broken for
some reason and then ask all users
On Sep 29, 2014, at 6:01 AM, Nick Coghlan
ncogh...@gmail.commailto:ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 Sep 2014 19:50, Nick Coghlan
ncogh...@gmail.commailto:ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 Sep 2014 19:04, M.-A. Lemburg
m...@egenix.commailto:m...@egenix.com wrote:
Do you seriously want to
(Fixed quoting indent + some own comments)
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 11:04 +, Donald Stufft wrote:
On Sep 29, 2014, at 6:01 AM, Nick Coghlan
ncogh...@gmail.commailto:ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 Sep 2014 19:50, Nick Coghlan
ncogh...@gmail.commailto:ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On
On Sep 29, 2014, at 4:46 AM, M.-A. Lemburg
m...@egenix.commailto:m...@egenix.com wrote:
You are missing out on cases, where the release process causes files to
be omitted, human errors where packagers forget to apply changes to
e.g. documentation files, version files, change logs, etc., where
On 29 Sep 2014 21:04, Donald Stufft donald.stu...@rackspace.com wrote:
On Sep 29, 2014, at 6:01 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
One caveat on this: it would potentially be convenient to have a
release field in the wheel naming scheme, and adopt a similar approach
for other binary
On 29 Sep 2014 21:20, holger krekel hol...@merlinux.eu wrote:
(Fixed quoting indent + some own comments)
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 11:04 +, Donald Stufft wrote:
On Sep 29, 2014, at 6:01 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.commailto:
ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
It's the silent substitution of
On 29 Sep 2014, at 13:58, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Right, this is my perspective as well. The point that the wheel format
already includes a build ordering field was significant because that file
naming scheme has an official specification.
Other commands like bdist_egg,
On September 29, 2014 at 8:54:26 AM, Wichert Akkerman (wich...@wiggy.net) wrote:
On 29 Sep 2014, at 13:58, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Right, this is my perspective as well. The point that the wheel format already
includes a build ordering field was significant because that file naming
On 29 Sep 2014, at 15:21, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
On September 29, 2014 at 8:54:26 AM, Wichert Akkerman (wich...@wiggy.net)
wrote:
On 29 Sep 2014, at 13:58, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Right, this is my perspective as well. The point that the wheel format
already
On September 29, 2014 at 9:25:37 AM, Wichert Akkerman (wich...@wiggy.net) wrote:
On 29 Sep 2014, at 15:21, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
On September 29, 2014 at 8:54:26 AM, Wichert Akkerman (wich...@wiggy.net) wrote:
On 29 Sep 2014, at 13:58, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Donald Stufft
donald.stu...@rackspace.com wrote:
Hello All!
I'd like to discuss the idea of moving PyPI to having immutable files.
...
+1
Jim
--
Jim Fulton
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimfulton
___
Distutils-SIG
On Sep 28, 2014, at 07:31 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
I'd like to discuss the idea of moving PyPI to having immutable files. This
would mean that once you publish a particular file you can never reupload
that file again with different contents. This would still allow deleting the
file or reuploading
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 28, 2014, at 07:31 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
I'd like to discuss the idea of moving PyPI to having immutable files. This
would mean that once you publish a particular file you can never reupload
that file again with
On September 29, 2014 at 10:41:07 AM, Ian Cordasco (graffatcolmin...@gmail.com)
wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 28, 2014, at 07:31 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
I'd like to discuss the idea of moving PyPI to having immutable files. This
+1
On Sep 29, 2014 7:29 AM, Jim Fulton j...@zope.com wrote:
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Donald Stufft
donald.stu...@rackspace.com wrote:
Hello All!
I'd like to discuss the idea of moving PyPI to having immutable files.
...
+1
Jim
--
Jim Fulton
On Sep 29, 2014, at 09:40 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote:
That's essentially what I see as the chief use-case for
testpypi.python.org. I don't think pypi.python.org needs to support
this as well. Simple is better than complex after all :)
Can we then make it easy to upload to testpypi via the cli?
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 29, 2014, at 09:40 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote:
That's essentially what I see as the chief use-case for
testpypi.python.org. I don't think pypi.python.org needs to support
this as well. Simple is better than complex after
On September 29, 2014 at 11:04:42 AM, Barry Warsaw (ba...@python.org) wrote:
On Sep 29, 2014, at 09:40 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote:
That's essentially what I see as the chief use-case for
testpypi.python.org. I don't think pypi.python.org needs to support
this as well. Simple is better than
On 30 Sep 2014 00:43, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
Yea I don’t think PyPI needs anything for this, if someone wants to do it
they can use testpypi.python.org, or they can stand up a devpi instance
which offers a similar thing plus a lot more for a release process.
It occurs to me that
On 29 Sep 2014 22:09, Wichert Akkerman wich...@wiggy.net wrote:
On 29 Sep 2014, at 13:58, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Right, this is my perspective as well. The point that the wheel format
already includes a build ordering field was significant because that file
naming scheme has an
On September 29, 2014 at 5:33:38 PM, Nick Coghlan (ncogh...@gmail.com) wrote:
On 30 Sep 2014 00:43, Donald Stufft wrote:
Yea I don’t think PyPI needs anything for this, if someone wants to do it
they can use testpypi.python.org, or they can stand up a devpi instance
which offers a similar
On 29 September 2014 23:16, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
It occurs to me that a devpi quickstart for OpenShift (or another PaaS's)
free tier could be useful - if a devpi instance is just for pre-release
testing of packages, then the free tier should accommodate it comfortably.
I'm
29 matches
Mail list logo
