Am 18.01.2010 um 21:47 schrieb Martin v. Löwis: >> FWIW, I don't see the PEP to be completed. The actual mirror >> protocol, how to handle multiple (unsynchronized) indexes and the API >> design are clearly undecided -- and not discussed. > > The actual mirror protocol *is* decided, even though it's not explicitly > spelled out in the PEP. It is based entirely on existing API; no new API > on the PyPI side is planned. Basically, you do a lot of HTTP GETs.
If it's decided why isn't it public in the PEP? If you want developers to contribute you need stop deciding in private. > As Tarek explains, the handling of unsynchronized indices is also > discussed. Each mirror has a timestamp of last synchronization. > > I expect that mirrors won't be behind more than two minutes. If you > have a strong requirement to provide a better quality, you'll need > to propose a PEP change. I would personally prefer to have such a > feature only in a future revision of the protocol, based on practical > experience. See above. > If you would like to propose a push model, I'd be curious what the > advantage would be of one of the complicated-sounding APIs you mentioned > over a simple trigger URL that the mirror might provide. See mail to Tarek. Jannis _______________________________________________ Catalog-SIG mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
