Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

On 2017-09-29 17:31:10 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote: > OK, I got individual PTL confirmation that it was OK to remove all of > those from PyPI: > > mistral-extra 2015.1.0 > mistral-dashboard 2015.1.* > > networking-odl, 2015.1.1 2015.1.dev986 > > networking-midonet, 2014.2.2 and various

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

OK, I got individual PTL confirmation that it was OK to remove all of those from PyPI: mistral-extra 2015.1.0 mistral-dashboard 2015.1.* networking-odl, 2015.1.1 2015.1.dev986 networking-midonet, 2014.2.2 and various 2015.1.* versions (might have been removed by networking-midonet folks by

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

I confirm that you can delete mistral versions with “2015”. Thanks Renat Akhmerov @Nokia On 15 Sep 2017, 23:58 +0700, Rong Zhu , wrote: > +1 for murano-dashboard and murano-agent > > On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 1:51 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

+1 for murano-dashboard and murano-agent On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 1:51 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Claudiu Belu wrote: >> So, I believe the general consensus is that the easiest thing to do is to >> unpublish the 2015.1.0 version from pypi, with which I also agree. >> [...]

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

On 2017-09-07 08:59:15 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote: > Jeremy Stanley wrote: > > On 2017-09-01 09:51:36 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote: > > [...] > >> Yes, for a first batch I propose we clean up the following: > >> > >> python-congressclient 2015.1.0 > >> python-congressclient

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2017-09-01 09:51:36 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote: > [...] >> Yes, for a first batch I propose we clean up the following: >> >> python-congressclient 2015.1.0 >> python-congressclient 2015.1.0rc1 >> python-designateclient 2013.1.a8.g3a2a320 >> networking-hyperv

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

On 2017-09-01 09:51:36 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote: [...] > Yes, for a first batch I propose we clean up the following: > > python-congressclient 2015.1.0 > python-congressclient 2015.1.0rc1 > python-designateclient 2013.1.a8.g3a2a320 > networking-hyperv 2015.1.0 [...] Are we waiting for

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

: Friday, September 01, 2017 10:51 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with .X.Z versions Claudiu Belu wrote: > So, I believe the general consensus is that the easiest thing to do is to > unpublish the 2015.1.0 version fro

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

Claudiu Belu wrote: > So, I believe the general consensus is that the easiest thing to do is to > unpublish the 2015.1.0 version from pypi, with which I also agree. > [...] Yes, for a first batch I propose we clean up the following: python-congressclient 2015.1.0 python-congressclient

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

r opinions! Best regards, Claudiu Belu From: Jeremy Stanley [fu...@yuggoth.org] Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2017 3:05 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi wit

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

On 2017-08-31 15:21:19 +1000 (+1000), Tony Breeds wrote: [...] > I assume it's infra that needs to do the actual unpublish? We're the ones with the most consistent access to all of them, though in a majority of cases there's at least one other account with sufficient access to do the same (it

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 05:04:58PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Tony Breeds wrote: > > An extension to this would be to check for other items in the same boat. > > I wrote [1] to find anything in the openstack namespace that isn't a > > service and has something that looks like a date based

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

Tony Breeds wrote: > An extension to this would be to check for other items in the same boat. > I wrote [1] to find anything in the openstack namespace that isn't a > service and has something that looks like a date based release on pypi. > [...] Thanks for computing the list. Unpublishing is a

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

On 17-08-29 15:58:55, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2017-08-29 10:30:42 -0500 (-0500), Matthew Thode wrote: > [...] > > 3. reversion. Start new versions at 3000 or something, kinda > > dirty imo. > > And sort of a 3.1 option is to prepend a PEP 440 version epoch: > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 02:09:32PM +, Claudiu Belu wrote: > (test) ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ pip freeze | grep networking-hyperv > > (test) ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ pip install networking-hyperv I know this isn't a solution but I'd be remiss if I didn't point it out:

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

On 2017-08-29 18:26:49 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote: [...] > Yeah, in that specific case I think that's the simplest route. It's not > really destroying it, it just prevents PyPI from erroneously > distributing it, without having to add a PEP440-Epoch to an OpenStack > deliverable and

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

Doug Hellmann wrote: > If that 2015 version is no longer maintained, then deleting it from > PyPI may be the most effective way to avoid this particular support > issue, even though that is normally not something we recommend. Yeah, in that specific case I think that's the simplest route. It's

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

On 2017-08-29 10:30:42 -0500 (-0500), Matthew Thode wrote: [...] > 3. reversion. Start new versions at 3000 or something, kinda > dirty imo. And sort of a 3.1 option is to prepend a PEP 440 version epoch: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0440/#version-epochs Challenge there is that,

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

Excerpts from Claudiu Belu's message of 2017-08-29 14:09:32 +: > Hello, > > As many of you know, during Kilo, the neutron vendor decomposition happened, > which lead to the birth of many networking-* libraries, including > networking-hyperv. When it was time for us to make a release for

Re: [openstack-dev] [relmgt] Libraries published to pypi with YYYY.X.Z versions

On 17-08-29 14:09:32, Claudiu Belu wrote: > Hello, > > As many of you know, during Kilo, the neutron vendor decomposition happened, > which lead to the birth of many networking-* libraries, including > networking-hyperv. When it was time for us to make a release for that cycle, > pretty much