Re: [Distutils] Name arbitration on PyPI (was: The mypy package)

> On Apr 18, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: > >> >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 6:14 PM, Glyph > > wrote: >> >> >>> On Apr 18, 2016, at 2:31 PM, Ian Cordasco >>

Re: [Distutils] Name arbitration on PyPI (was: The mypy package)

> On Apr 18, 2016, at 6:14 PM, Glyph wrote: > > >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 2:31 PM, Ian Cordasco > > wrote: >> >> I have in fact offered but the author refuses to accept help from >> anyone. They're also the

Re: [Distutils] Name arbitration on PyPI (was: The mypy package)

> On Apr 18, 2016, at 3:11 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: > > If we mandated semver (or something like it) we could make it so that > transferring a name *forced* a major version bump and the new author would be > unable to release anything using a smaller major version number,

Re: [Distutils] Name arbitration on PyPI (was: The mypy package)

> On Apr 18, 2016, at 2:31 PM, Ian Cordasco wrote: > > I have in fact offered but the author refuses to accept help from > anyone. They're also the author of the C library (libyaml) and they do > not maintain that either. It's actually quite frustrating as someone >

Re: [Distutils] Name arbitration on PyPI (was: The mypy package)

> On Apr 18, 2016, at 5:16 PM, Chris Barker wrote: > > 1. PyYAML is a package that would be de-registered in such a scheme. It is > a highly used, extremely popular, package that unserializes text into > arbitrary python objects. It is a trusted package... and one

Re: [Distutils] Name arbitration on PyPI (was: The mypy package)

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Ian Cordasco wrote: > >> 1. PyYAML is a package that would be de-registered in such a scheme. > It > > > and you don't think ANYONE would be willing to take on the miniscule > amount > > of work to maintain the name? Plus there

Re: [Distutils] Name arbitration on PyPI (was: The mypy package)

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Chris Barker wrote: > You've made a strong case, and this is probably not where PyPi should go -- > but it would hardly be a disaster: > >> >> The idea of expiring out names has been brought up recently to resolve an >> issue of two

Re: [Distutils] Name arbitration on PyPI (was: The mypy package)

You've made a strong case, and this is probably not where PyPi should go -- but it would hardly be a disaster: > The idea of expiring out names has been brought up recently to resolve an > issue of two packages, one popular and large; another someone's weekend > project. The issue here is not

[Distutils] Name arbitration on PyPI (was: The mypy package)

The idea of expiring out names has been brought up recently to resolve an issue of two packages, one popular and large; another someone's weekend project. The general idea being that a project maintainer should be forced to renew their contact information, or face the possibility of the PyPI