On 9/27/12 5:40 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Tarek Ziadé <tarek <at> ziade.org> writes:
There are two of us maintaining hg.python.org: Georg and I. So, I don't
know about Georg, but I don't want to maintain repositories for every
third-party library that might one day become part of Python. OTOH, if
Georg wants to handle it, then fine
Since I see distutils2, unittest2, stackless and many users repo in there,
Please define the exact rules here - rather than you willingness to do
the benevolent work.
and what you mean by maintaining an extra repo exactly.
Maintaining a repo means setting it up and possibly changing the configuration
(e.g. commit hooks) when required. This is all done by hand by one of us.
My main point is not that hg.p.o is closed to new repositories, but that it is
not meant to become a "forge" or an incubator where anyone can create new
Python repos. Is distlib important enough yet?
I don't know what you mean by 'important'
We removed packaging from Python and said we would work on a smaller set
for inclusion.
I've also said that I believed that it's simpler to include back wrt
licensing if it's a code base
that's under the contributors agreement.
Last but not least, distlib is the plan forward endorsed by python-dev,
so having it
in hg.python.org makes that plan more legitimate, no ?
I frankly don't follow your reluctance here, and I find your definition
of what can
be in hg.python.org to be very vague
When I asked for a distutils2 repository it was done in 2 minutes and I
did not
have to argue for hours and potentially push the discussion to yet
another packaging drama
This is really annoying :/
Regards
Antoine.
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
