On 9/27/12 5:40 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Tarek Ziadé
writes: There are two of us maintaining hg.python.org: Georg and I. So, I don't know about Georg, but I don't want to maintain repositories for every third-party library that might one day become part of Python. OTOH, if Georg wants to handle it, then fine Since I see distutils2, unittest2, stackless and many users repo in there, Please define the exact rules here - rather than you willingness to do the benevolent work.
and what you mean by maintaining an extra repo exactly. Maintaining a repo means setting it up and possibly changing the configuration (e.g. commit hooks) when required. This is all done by hand by one of us.
My main point is not that hg.p.o is closed to new repositories, but that it is not meant to become a "forge" or an incubator where anyone can create new Python repos. Is distlib important enough yet?
I don't know what you mean by 'important' We removed packaging from Python and said we would work on a smaller set for inclusion. I've also said that I believed that it's simpler to include back wrt licensing if it's a code base that's under the contributors agreement. Last but not least, distlib is the plan forward endorsed by python-dev, so having it in hg.python.org makes that plan more legitimate, no ? I frankly don't follow your reluctance here, and I find your definition of what can be in hg.python.org to be very vague When I asked for a distutils2 repository it was done in 2 minutes and I did not have to argue for hours and potentially push the discussion to yet another packaging drama This is really annoying :/
Regards
Antoine.
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig