On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:47 PM, Chris Barker <chris.bar...@noaa.gov> wrote:
> > I'm suggesting that the "in perpetuity" bit is NOT a good way to go -- > packages are abandoned, and the longer this goes on, the more issues will > arise. > > Problem is cat's out of the bag here. There are three issues: - Can't just change the rules underneath everyone. If we'd be making a package repository today, it would be fine - everything would know the rules. There's a huge surprise factor here and a recipe for drama if this is changed. If we'd change this perpetuity rule it wouldn't be possible to let everyone know about it - read receipts for email don't really exist. - Would taking mypy package from random Chinese dude no one seems to care about be fair? First release of mypy is in 2009 <https://pypi.python.org/pypi/mypy/json> while mypy-lang's first commit is in 2012. Jukka would had done well if he'd used a different name for the project, or resolved the ownership issue back then. - Where do you draw the line for "abandoned"? Whom would you allow to confiscate ownership? It's impossible to come up with a non-arbitrary set of rules. Plus I'm pretty sure the Chinese dude didn't even read or understood the mail - we're talking about taking his package while he didn't even reply. Seriously? Give it time it will sort itself out. Thanks, -- Ionel Cristian Mărieș, http://blog.ionelmc.ro
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig