On 21 May 2014 10:34, "Daniel Holth" <[email protected]> wrote: > > The last release of the old package should depend on the new. > > We also have an "obsoleted by" key in the new metadata iirc.
Yep. The reason for doing it this way (i.e. requiring a change to the original package to indicate the replacement) is that it's the only way to avoid malicious hijacking on an uncurated index like PyPI while still notifying automated systems of name changes. Cheers, Nick. > > On May 20, 2014 8:29 PM, "Richard Jones" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I occasionally receive requests from package maintainers asking to >> have their PyPI package renamed (for example, renaming >> "eyepea_monitoring_agent" to "tanto"). The only response I have at the >> moment is to tell them to release their package under both the new and >> old names in parallel, and promote only the new name, as the PyPI name >> must match the name defined in setup.py. >> >> I'd like to open up discussion to ideas about how to handle this better. >> >> Somewhat related would be *perhaps* allowing a package named "Pillow" >> to be installed when a requirement requests "PIL" via some kind of >> aliasing mechanism. >> >> >> Richard >> _______________________________________________ >> Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig > > > _______________________________________________ > Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig >
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
