Am 20.09.2010 23:20, schrieb P.J. Eby: > At 09:26 PM 9/20/2010 +0200, Martin v. Löwis wrote: >> That's how I would have implemented it. Alas, this very >> idea was just shot down. > > Hm. When the issue was adding comments to PyPI, you mostly ignored the > strong opposition from people who didn't want to use the feature, in > order to support those who did.
Back then, I firmly believed that the feature was absolutely important to have. Now, I admit that people can get the information if they download all sdists. If there is demand for it, someone could also provide a service that extracts all sdists, and provides the files off-site, to reduce bandwidth usage for end-users. So unlike with the comment system, the world is not going to end without the feature. > While I'm only +0 (at most) on adding egg_info, I'm not sure why the > objections of people who won't be using the feature should carry more > weight in the present discussion than in the previous one. ;-) If I understand correctly, it's more than that, though (and I would easily continue ignoring people who object to a feature just because they are not going to use it). I feel that the core of the objection (from Tarek in particular) is that it is viewed as directly competing to PEP 345. While I personally think that this objection is flawed (i.e. exposing the data will not have any significant impact on the PEP 345 adoption rate), I also value Tarek's recent contributions to PyPI, and accept his doubts (even though I don't share them). Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ Catalog-SIG mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
