[Good replies from Donald, Paul, et al already, but rather than
replying to individual points, I figure it's best to just respond to
Chris's original question with my own thoughts]
On 23 July 2016 at 01:47, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal
wrote:
> Right now, the barrier to
A more conservative approach might be to flag high-risk, typo-prone package
names as requiring moderator approval to register. Some combination of
looking at common 404s (or whatever happens when a client asks for a
non-existent package), some string metrics (Levenshtein, Jaro, whatever) to
an
On 07/22/2016 12:39 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
On Jul 22, 2016, at 11:47 AM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal
wrote:
If the core devs think it's fine and dandy like it is, we can all stop
talking about it.
I think they’re certainly a problem. The current solutions that have
We've been discussing here at least two different problems related to
package maintainership:
1. Abandoned/no-longer-maintained, but previously useful packages
2. namespace and package idea space pollution due to tests/aborted
attempts/packaginginexperience.
I don't have a good idea about 1,
This should be fine. We pin versions in the deployment and we can’t land
changes without passing tests.
> On Jul 20, 2016, at 12:24 AM, Wes Turner wrote:
>
> From @asksol "Time to pin your versions if you haven’t already. Celery 4 is
> out soon: https://t.co/XpZqbjt91t
> On Jul 22, 2016, at 11:47 AM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal
> wrote:
>
>
> If the core devs think it's fine and dandy like it is, we can all stop
> talking about it.
I think they’re certainly a problem. The current solutions that have been
proposed have their own
> On Jul 22, 2016, at 11:47 AM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal
> wrote:
>
>
> If the core devs think it's fine and dandy like it is, we can all stop
> talking about it.
I think they’re certainly a problem. The current solutions that have been
proposed have their own
On 22 July 2016 at 16:47, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal
wrote:
> But it's totally unclear to me whether the core devs don't think these
> are problems worth addressing, or think they can only be addresses
> with major effort that no one has time for.
Speaking for myself,
Getting to this thread late, but it didn't seem that was resolved in
the least, so I'll as my $0.02
> That overall got me thinking about namespace pollution in pip, that
> once something is pushed in, it's like to stay there forever.
This REALLY is a problem, and one that will only get worse. It