> On May 3, 2016, at 1:42 PM, Stefan Krah <ste...@bytereef.org> wrote: > > I don't fully understand your explanation. Judging by the link that > Donald posted (thanks!) it seems that PEP 470 introduced extra work > for him that would not have been present had things been left in place.
IIRC the PyPI maintainers were constantly nagged about “PyPI reliability issues” that were instead external hosting issues. Everybody was affected every now and then whenever tummy.com or other external servers for popular packages were down. Or at least I know *I was*. Way too often. > But if the majority prefers PyPI that way, I'll stop arguing. I’m not sure what you mean here but if you want to argue for reverting PEP 470, I wouldn’t hold my breath. -- Ł
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ 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
