Today after seeing the message regarding a new user being confused as to how to install, I decided I would chime in on this topic. I'm very much in favor of "ease of use" for the user, perhaps not so much for the coder (who already has far more technical knowledge than most users, as is needed to actually write the program)
On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 12:14 PM Edward K. Ream <edream...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am at the end of my patience with PyPI <https://pypi.org/project/leo/>: > > > - The process is error-prone, as we have just seen. > Are the errors based upon unreal expectations? Do you expect to be able to replace the same version of a file with materially new code? This would break things if it happened to everything on PyPI. Material changes in code should not be the same version number. Linux distros that patch code from release versions for their specific distribution always add on a different version number, because their version is materially different. 'Sure its based on v 1.2.3, but we've now made it 1.2.3.ubuntu5' or somesuch. > - PyPI is thwarting the upgrade of leo-6.7.7.tar.gz. > I don't think "Thwarting" is the right term for preventing unforeseen errors when someone expects 1 version of a package and gets materially different code than was just released, with the same version. Is the version numbering system too set-in-stone to contemplate 1.2.3.4 style of major.minor.feature.bugfix versioning? I think 6.7.7.1 is quite a useful version for "hey i removed a folder, heres the updated code". It has no feature/functional difference. But definitely fixes a bug. The way you describe your problems with PyPI makes it seem you are dead-set on re-releasing a broken version as the same number, as opposed to simply incrementing the bugfix version number. > I don't know why. The error message seems wrong. > I've tried searching for this in mail history, forgive me if I haven't found something already posted, but what was this error? > - Even with help, 2-factor authentication is too complicated. > > What about PyPI 2FA is complex? Moreso than Github at least? > - PyPI is designed for packages, not apps. > What is an "App", but a package, with dependencies? I wager "ls" is an app. sure "coreutils" is a package, but you could package "ls" by itself if you really wanted to, by rejiggering the configuration for coreutils to only produce 'ls' .. An arbitrary example of course. Where do you draw the line? > Instead, I propose the following: > > > - Release all new versions of Leo using GitHub releases > <https://github.com/leo-editor/leo-editor/releases>. > > - Release new versions at least once a year and more often as needed to > support LeoJS or LeoInteg. > Your thoughts? > Github releases are great, but I firmly believe there needs to be some overlap to what is known as common practice (PyPI) If the latest PyPI release actually installed the Leo, but then at the same time Leo also included automatic GIT updating from GitHub, that would work. However, I still think keeping it in PyPI as an alternative to github is ideal. Mike -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/CAN%2B%2B4hGpkK1wJNBpwRr-YRSNqyiDXSOQp%3Djov3a%3D4aE70z%2BD-A%40mail.gmail.com.
