Hello Jacob,
Good to hear from you! Thanks for stating your concerns so clearly, and
we do understand them. We agree that inertia is important to maintain.
In fact, we are excited to show this in person to the PyPI community on
Friday.
We expect to release a design document and a demo in a few hours. Let me
finish my midterm, and then I will get back to you :)
Thanks,
Trishank
On 03/12/2013 04:35 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[email protected]> wrote:
As I've said, the implementation details aren't of a concern to me;
the result is.
You know what though, I kinda lied.
While I don't care about the implementation, I *do* care about keeping
this process moving forward. Holger has a PEP that's essentially done
(if controversial), and Donald's offered to implement it. The PyCon
sprints next week means we'll have a ton of focused attention, so
there's a very good chance if we strike now we'll have this done in
the next couple weeks.
So yeah, I'm going to back the proposal that has a critical mass
behind it, and it solves the problem. My experience with Python
packaging is that there's a massive amount of inertia, so I think it's
pretty vital to get work done while there are people who've got time
to work on it.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but unless there's actually
something really wrong with Holger's proposal I can't see why we'd
want to wait for some hypothetically better solution.
Jacob
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
