On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Ronny Pfannschmidt < opensource@ronnypfannschmidt.de> wrote:
Instead of overtaking, how about clearly marking packages as abandoned/maintained clearly pointing out the mark was imposed by community action
I think that would be a good idea -- and maybe start with just that -- then we'd learn how big an issue it really was, etc.
and listing potential/primary replacements
that required real work on someone's part -- so not sure when that would actually happen.
its important that community imposed abandonment is not simply removable by doing a minor "noop"-release,
why not? I brought tis all up to address truly abandoned projects -- maybe we want to go some day to the idea of the names being community owned, but that's not the way ti is now -- and if someone makes the effort to do a noop release, then they have no abandoned the name -- maybe aren't maintaining it worth a damn, but there you go. Personally, I think there is no point in anything between the current free for all, and a "curated" package repo -- a curated repo would support the idea that anything on it had met some minimum standard: no malware, some maintenance, some minimum usefulness, etc. It's kind of a shame that there are so many "toy" packages and experiments on PyPi, but in fact, it's worked pretty darn well.. pip could warn on installation/update
I think that would be good too -Chris -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception Chris.Barker@noaa.gov