On 10/29/21 05:49, Miro Hrončok wrote:
For some of them (e.g. mako), this seems to be a mistake even.
There are a lot of "dev0" versions in that set, so I took a look for the
cause. It looks like all of the "dev0" packages use github source
rather than PyPI sources, which means that none of
Am 30.10.21 um 21:42 schrieb Gordon Messmer:
I'd suggest that we should instead strongly encourage the use of PyPI URLs.
I agree that pypi downloads are usually preferable. However I had to use github
tarballs sometimes as upstream did not ship the test suite for pypi tarballs...
Just my 2
Almost all of the Python packages I maintain have something useful in the
GitHub archive that isn’t in the PyPI archive. I find that PyPI source
distributions commonly lack test suites and usually lack documentation. I
choose PyPI sources where all else is equal, but in a lot of cases using GitH
On Sat, Oct 30, 2021 at 8:42 PM Gordon Messmer
wrote:
> On 10/29/21 05:49, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > For some of them (e.g. mako), this seems to be a mistake even.
>
>
> There are a lot of "dev0" versions in that set, so I took a look for the
> cause. It looks like all of the "dev0" packages use g
On 10/30/21 13:12, Felix Schwarz wrote:
Am 30.10.21 um 21:42 schrieb Gordon Messmer:
I'd suggest that we should instead strongly encourage the use of PyPI
URLs.
I agree that pypi downloads are usually preferable. However I had to
use github tarballs sometimes as upstream did not ship the test
On 10/30/21 13:57, Ian McInerney wrote:
I disagree. PyPI is basically a packaging environment, so
using the tarballs from there would mean we are then subject
to the curation decisions by the people who package the
