On 14 October 2015 at 19:48, Matthew Brett wrote:
> I'm guessing that this is what y'all expected?
Yes, that sounds right. 1.10.0.post2 is a new (different) release
number, and so a new release would be created.
Paul
___
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distu
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Oct 14, 2015 11:12 AM, "Donald Stufft" wrote:
>>
> [...]
>>> Apparently some packages were making assumptions about the format of the
>>> numpy.__version__ string, and having .postN in there caused errors when they
>>> tried to pr
FYI, this was discussed recently here too:
https://github.com/pypa/packaging-problems/issues/74
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Wes Turner wrote:
>
> On Oct 14, 2015 12:05 PM, "Ionel Cristian Mărieș"
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 7:43 PM, Chris Barker
> wrote:
> >>
> >> some pa
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
> On October 14, 2015 at 5:17:42 PM, Nathaniel Smith (n...@pobox.com) wrote:
>> > @Donald: is there somewhere we should be filing these warehouse
>> wish list things so they don't get lost? :-)
>
> https://github.com/pypa/warehouse/issues
http
Ben Finney writes:
> Apache License 2.0 imposes no additional reastrictions on the
> recipient of a work licensed under GNU GPL v3. So that meets the
> conditions of both.
Apache License 2.0 does impose further restrictions not found in GPL v2
though. Sorry for the confusion.
Nathaniel Smith
FWIW https://github.com/pypa/pip/pull/3146 exists for the wheel cache.
Concerning http cache and https://github.com/ionrock/cachecontrol the main
issue is that the cached request is not present in the cache. We only have
a "hash -> response" mapping.
I plan to make a PR asking to also keep the req
On Oct 14, 2015 10:02 PM, "Ben Finney" wrote:
>
> Nathaniel Smith writes:
>
> > That's under Apache 2, so it can't be used by GPLv2 packages, or any
> > package that might be used by GPLv2 packages.
>
> I'm not sure what the claim is here, but it seems false to me.
>
> Apache License 2.0 permits
Nathaniel Smith writes:
> That's under Apache 2, so it can't be used by GPLv2 packages, or any
> package that might be used by GPLv2 packages.
I'm not sure what the claim is here, but it seems false to me.
Apache License 2.0 permits a derived work to be released under a
different license (even
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:23 PM, Chris Barker
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1:59 PM, David Cournapeau
> wrote:
>
>> But I'm talking about the cases of "whoops! I really wish I hadn't
>>> uploaded that one". We can improve the tooling (some discussion on this in
>>> this thread right now...),
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
> On October 14, 2015 at 6:24:55 PM, Chris Barker (chris.bar...@noaa.gov)
> wrote:
> > > another note-- conda has teh concetp of a "build" that's tacked
> > on teh release for conda pacakges.
> >
> > So if I updated somethign about how teh pac
On October 14, 2015 at 6:24:55 PM, Chris Barker (chris.bar...@noaa.gov) wrote:
> > another note-- conda has teh concetp of a "build" that's tacked
> on teh release for conda pacakges.
>
> So if I updated somethign about how teh packge is buitl, but am
> using teh same underllying version of t
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1:59 PM, David Cournapeau
wrote:
> But I'm talking about the cases of "whoops! I really wish I hadn't
>> uploaded that one". We can improve the tooling (some discussion on this in
>> this thread right now...), but people are people and some of us are stupid
>> and/or carel
On October 14, 2015 at 6:13:14 PM, Chris Barker (chris.bar...@noaa.gov) wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> > > And it just seems pedantic to say: hey -- you've already put that one
> > there
> > > -- maybe even two minutes ago, so there is NO WAY to fix your mista
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Ionel Cristian Mărieș
wrote:
> This reminds me of Gmail's "unsend" feature where email would be delayed
> 10 seconds or something, giving a window to press the unsend button.
>
FWIW, I am a big fan of that -- and use it with remarkably frequency. --
maybe I'm j
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
> > And it just seems pedantic to say: hey -- you've already put that one
> there
> > -- maybe even two minutes ago, so there is NO WAY to fix your mistake. If
> > it happens quickly, then no one has downloaded it, it hasn't made its way
> > t
On October 14, 2015 at 5:17:42 PM, Nathaniel Smith (n...@pobox.com) wrote:
> > @Donald: is there somewhere we should be filing these warehouse
> wish list things so they don't get lost? :-)
https://github.com/pypa/warehouse/issues
-
Donald Stufft
PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7
On October 14, 2015 at 5:01:49 PM, Glyph Lefkowitz (gl...@twistedmatrix.com)
wrote:
>
> > On Oct 14, 2015, at 1:04 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
> >
> > Generally within 60-120 seconds it’s available in mirrors (most of them
> > resync once
> a minute). If anyone has downloaded it then they will
On Oct 14, 2015 1:55 PM, "Glyph Lefkowitz" wrote:
>
>
>> On Oct 14, 2015, at 10:36 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>>
>> My feeling is that pypi is correct to disallow the mutation of releases
once they become public, but that the ergonomics around this could probably
be improved :-). A more general s
On 15 October 2015 at 10:01, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
>
> On Oct 14, 2015, at 1:04 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> Generally within 60-120 seconds it’s available in mirrors (most of them
> resync once a minute). If anyone has downloaded it then they will have
> pretty much permanently cached the packa
> On Oct 14, 2015, at 4:55 PM, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
>
>
>> On Oct 14, 2015, at 10:36 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>>
>> My feeling is that pypi is correct to disallow the mutation of releases once
>> they become public, but that the ergonomics around this could probably be
>> improved :-).
On 15 October 2015 at 09:55, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
>
> On Oct 14, 2015, at 10:36 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>
> My feeling is that pypi is correct to disallow the mutation of releases once
> they become public, but that the ergonomics around this could probably be
> improved :-). A more general
> On Oct 14, 2015, at 10:36 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>
> My feeling is that pypi is correct to disallow the mutation of releases once
> they become public, but that the ergonomics around this could probably be
> improved :-). A more general solution that might be nice to have Someday
> woul
> On Oct 14, 2015, at 1:04 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> Generally within 60-120 seconds it’s available in mirrors (most of them
> resync once a minute). If anyone has downloaded it then they will have pretty
> much permanently cached the package, first in the download cache and then
> again i
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 8:52 PM, Chris Barker wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Dave Forgac
> wrote:
>
>> This was discussed recently here:
>> https://github.com/pypa/packaging-problems/issues/74
>>
>
> and on this list at other times. Though the above issue was pretty focused
> on r
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
> Generally within 60-120 seconds it’s available in mirrors (most of them
> resync once a minute). If anyone has downloaded it then they will have
> pretty much permanently cached the package, first in the download cache and
> then again in t
On October 14, 2015 at 3:58:52 PM, Chris Barker (chris.bar...@noaa.gov) wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Dave Forgac
> wrote:
>
> > This was discussed recently here:
> > https://github.com/pypa/packaging-problems/issues/74
> >
>
> and on this list at other times. Though the above iss
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Dave Forgac
wrote:
> This was discussed recently here:
> https://github.com/pypa/packaging-problems/issues/74
>
and on this list at other times. Though the above issue was pretty focused
on restoring a deleted file without any changes -- which seems like a
no-bra
On October 14, 2015 at 3:05:57 PM, Robert Collins (robe...@robertcollins.net)
wrote:
> On 15 October 2015 at 07:27, Donald Stufft wrote:
> > On October 14, 2015 at 2:25:31 PM, Nathaniel Smith (n...@pobox.com) wrote:
> >> On Oct 14, 2015 11:12 AM, "Donald Stufft" wrote:
> >> >
> >> [...]
> >> >> Ap
On 15 October 2015 at 07:27, Donald Stufft wrote:
> On October 14, 2015 at 2:25:31 PM, Nathaniel Smith (n...@pobox.com) wrote:
>> On Oct 14, 2015 11:12 AM, "Donald Stufft" wrote:
>> >
>> [...]
>> >> Apparently some packages were making assumptions about the format of the
>> numpy.__version__ strin
On 14 October 2015 at 19:27, Donald Stufft wrote:
> I suspect it’d be trivial to relicense it. There’s a total of 6 contributors
> and I think I know how to get ahold of all of them.
I only contributed a tiny bit, but I'm happy for you to relicense if
you want to.
Paul
__
On October 14, 2015 at 2:27:40 PM, Donald Stufft (don...@stufft.io) wrote:
> On October 14, 2015 at 2:25:31 PM, Nathaniel Smith (n...@pobox.com) wrote:
> > On Oct 14, 2015 11:12 AM, "Donald Stufft" wrote:
> > >
> > [...]
> > >> Apparently some packages were making assumptions about the format of th
On October 14, 2015 at 2:25:31 PM, Nathaniel Smith (n...@pobox.com) wrote:
> On Oct 14, 2015 11:12 AM, "Donald Stufft" wrote:
> >
> [...]
> >> Apparently some packages were making assumptions about the format of the
> numpy.__version__ string, and having .postN in there caused errors when
> they tr
On Oct 14, 2015 11:12 AM, "Donald Stufft" wrote:
>
[...]
>> Apparently some packages were making assumptions about the format of the
numpy.__version__ string, and having .postN in there caused errors when
they tried to process it. (It would be helpful if there were a little
permissively licensed s
On October 14, 2015 at 1:37:05 PM, Nathaniel Smith (n...@pobox.com) wrote:
On Oct 14, 2015 10:04 AM, "Ionel Cristian Mărieș" wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 7:43 PM, Chris Barker wrote:
>>
>> some packages were unable to work with the postN suffix.
>
>
> Can you elaborate a bit more here?
On Oct 14, 2015 12:05 PM, "Ionel Cristian Mărieș"
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 7:43 PM, Chris Barker
wrote:
>>
>> some packages were unable to work with the postN suffix.
>
>
> Can you elaborate a bit more here?
AFAIU, the community best practice here is to issue a new release with a
b
On Oct 14, 2015 10:04 AM, "Ionel Cristian Mărieș"
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 7:43 PM, Chris Barker
wrote:
>>
>> some packages were unable to work with the postN suffix.
>
>
> Can you elaborate a bit more here?
>
Apparently some packages were making assumptions about the format of the
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 7:43 PM, Chris Barker wrote:
> some packages were unable to work with the postN suffix.
Can you elaborate a bit more here?
Thanks,
-- Ionel Cristian Mărieș, http://blog.ionelmc.ro
___
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-S
On 2015-10-14 09:43:25 -0700 (-0700), Chris Barker wrote:
[...]
> I propose that PyPi allow projects to replace existing files if
> they REALLY REALLY want to.
>
> You should have to jump through all sorts of hoops, and make it
> really clear that it is a BAD IDEA in the general case, but it'd
> b
38 matches
Mail list logo