On 9 May 2014 12:44, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: > We still wouldn't be forcing anyone to upload things to PyPI. We are, however, > discouraging people from not hosting on PyPI and providing incentives to doing > that.
But you're doing so by inflicting pain on people using pip to install those packages. Those users complain about *pip*, not about the packages. Better to directly impact the package maintainers, rather than their users (who are innocent victims). Better still of course to encourage people to improve things, not to punish them for not doing so. > I think it's important to point out that one of the driving factors that > caused > me to finally push for changes and what lead to PEP438 being created was that > Mercurial's external hosted was being extremely flaky. I can't remember the > exact details but I want to say that over the span of a week or two I was > getting massive numbers of users complaining that ``pip install Mercurial`` > was suddenly failing. This isn't to knock on the Mercurial folks or anything > but to simply point out that these problems aren't things that just happen to > (under|un)maintained software nor are they hypothetical. This PEP was born of > the frustration that was being relayed to me by end users of PyPI/pip. So now "pip install Mercurial" always fails? And adding a flag allows it to work as well as before, but no better? How did that fix the issue? Seriously - I'm missing something here. Paul _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
