Hi Gregor, On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 14:55, gregor herrmann <gre...@debian.org> wrote: > On Sat, 08 May 2010 08:27:40 -0400, Jonathan Yu wrote: > >> I see no reason for Perl's pip to have to change its name, simply >> because the author of Python's pip chose a name which was already in >> use by someone else, and because the author was already informed that >> something like this might happen, and chose to proceed anyway. > > The situation as I see it: > * Both upstream authors want to keep the name. > * Sandro wants the python package to keep pip, Jonathan wants the
just to clarify that it's not that I want it (i don't use it, after all) but given how strongly it's advertised (and by such a big player in the Python community as Raymond Hettinger, that mentioned it also today), then I see definitely a problem in renaming it. > pip doesn't have any rdepends. > I was curious what it was needed for in the first place; I had a > hunch about padre, and indeed: ... > And indeed, the graphs on http://qa.debian.org/popcon-graph.php?packages=pip > look much like the dates when pip was added/removed as a dependency > of padre. > > I'm not sure how useful/needed/... pip is on its own. But looking at > the (non-existant) rdepends and the popcon values I think RMing it > would be a viable solution. also looking at python-pip pocon (260, ~5 times more than pip-after-padre effect, ~20 times more than before) and how low is pip, and that also one of its maintainers is challanging its usefulness :) I think that maybe removing it would be the lowest impact action. Regards, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
