<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Martijn Faassen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:faassen@startifact.com">faassen@startifact.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">On 02/07/2012 07:18 AM, Kai Diefenbach wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">If a listed package is not available (because an external server is<br>
down) the index is broken.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
That's an interesting observation. I would think 'broken' is strong language, but it the index can at least be considered incorrect in that particular instance.<br>
<br>
If people have tools that rely on the index being correct, then this it being incorrect can be a problem. You can either say those tools shouldn't be used for "real" development work ("you're doing it wrong"), or encourage people to provide the package on PyPI as well (encouragement as a social solution), or consider facilities to provide redundancy (caching, mirroring) to help with the experience (a technical solution).<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Note, too, that prior to setuptools' development, there wasn't even any expectation that projects listed on PyPI even have a current *release*, or even have any *source code written* , let alone packages available for download from PyPI itself. (PyPI uploading was developed around the same time as the first versions of setuptools and EasyInstall.)</div>
<div><br></div><div>Just because the common use-case for PyPI nowadays is to pull down installation files, doesn't mean the previous use cases which PyPI catered to are gone or not worth supporting any more.</div><div>
<br></div></div>