On Aug 4, 2008, at 12:37 AM, Aaron Lehmann wrote:

On Aug 2, 2008, at 11:45 AM, Chris Withers wrote:

Benji York wrote:
In case anybody's wondering how this complies with our "no removal of any release whatsoever" policy [1], be assured that a 3.4dev-r73090 thing isn't a release by our standards. This version number not only contains the 'dev' marker, meaning it must have come from a development branch (possibly the trunk), it also contains the -rXXX suffix meaning it was made right from a subversion checkout without having created a tags first (why else would you
want to include the revision number).
Still, it's likely that someone was using it and their buildouts are now broken. We should have instead generated a proper release with a higher
version number and left the dev release alone.

This is silly.

Mistakes happen. Buildout and/or setuptools should be tolerant of accidental releases that are then removed from PyPI.

What currently happens in cases like this?

If the buildout is nailed to that version or above, and there is none, it breaks. Worse, if someone now adds another egg of the same version, but consumers have cached a version, their buildout won't download it, because it will already have that version in cache. I realize that this particular compound error is unlikely to happen in this instance, but the principle holds.

Yes, mistakes happen. What Benji is saying is that deletion is not the right way to remedy them, as unintuitive as that may seem.

I do agree that easy_install behavior is pretty insane wrt preferring dev releases over stable "old" releases. But I think it's pretty reasonable to delete accidental releases, whatever the behavior of setuptools/easy_install/buildout.

In the first case you mention where "buildout is nailed to that version or above", that would have to be in error, as the release shouldn't have been made in the first place. That also seems true of the second case, but I suppose the difference is the offended person is more innocent there: they should likely contact the person who released it and ask them to not do that again.

- C

Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to