On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:05 PM, M.-A. Lemburg <m...@egenix.com> wrote: ... > While custom classifiers would be nice, you'd also end up with > inconsistencies, different naming for the same thing and lots > of typos. > > Perhaps adding a limited form of such custom classifiers would > work out at least for some parts of the tree: > > If a::b is in the index, then qualifiers using a::b as prefix > would also be accepted, e.g. a::b::c and a::b::c::d. > > That way e.g. frameworks could start using subtrees that they manage > themselves.
Sounds like a good idea to me. The only required change is in the PyPI server software so it allows a custom part. Cheers -- Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org _______________________________________________ Catalog-SIG mailing list Catalog-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
