Re: [Python-Dev] PyPI comments and ratings, *really*?
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Jesse Noller wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:44:32 pm Ludvig Ericson wrote: >>> Why are there comments on PyPI? Moreso, why are there comments which >>> I cannot control as a package author on my very own packages? That's >>> just absurd. >> >> No, what's absurd is thinking that the act of publishing software >> somehow gives you the right to demand control over what others say >> about your software. >> >> I don't suppose that this rant of yours has something to do with the >> comment posted today? > > Frankly, I agree with him. As implemented, I *and others* think this > is broken. I've taken the stance of not publishing things to PyPi > until A> I find the time to contribute to make it better or B> It > changes. I'm not sure I see the utility of ratings, but I think comments can be useful as long as they don't carry over from release to release. For instance, suppose there's a bug in my package and someone leaves a comment about it. I don't want that comment still hanging around 3 years after I've already fixed the bug. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] PyPI comments and ratings, *really*?
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > (more seriously, the problem with a comment system is that once it takes off, > you need a whole array of functionalities to maintain a good S/N ratio. Just > allowing people to "comment" without any sort of moderation, filtering or > community building doesn't work) Why not allow ratings on comments as well? ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] PyPI governance
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Chris Withers wrote: > PS: While I'm sure a lot of python-dev people are interested in this topic, > I'm pretty sure this whole huge sprawling thread belongs on catalog-sig... +100 ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Distutils] At least one package management tool for 2.7
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Darren Dale wrote: > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Ian Bicking wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 7:27 AM, Olemis Lang wrote: > >> My experience is that only `install_requires` is needed (unless you > >> want to create app bundles AFAICR) , but in practice I've noticed that > >> *some* easy_installable packages are not pip-able (though I had no > >> time to figure out why :-/ ) > > > > Usually this is because Setuptools is poking at objects to do its > > work, while pip tries to work mostly with subprocesses. Though to > > complicate things a bit, pip makes sure the Setuptools monkeypatches > > to distutils are applied, so that it's always as though the setup.py > > says "from setuptools import setup". easy_install *also* does this. > > > > But then easy_install starts calling methods and whatnot, while pip just > does: > > > > setup.py install --single-version-externally-managed --no-deps > > --record some_tmp_file > > > > The --no-deps keeps Setuptools from resolving dependencies > > Seeking clarification: how can pip recursively install dependencies > *and* keep Setuptools from resolving dependencies? > > Using the --no-deps option to setup.py ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
