On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, T-Methy Moddletin wrote:

Mon, 29 Nov 1999 08:57:02 -0500, Greg Ward <gward@cnri.reston.va.us> wrote:

...

Cool... BUT I worry that having multiple Python archives or meta-archives might be as bad as having none at all.

Ouch. (-: Ah well, since this is the state of things, at least we may as well have a way to more conveniently search for what's out there.

Don't let Greg dissuade you. In almost all cases, something is better than nothing. The current state of a Python archive (or index) is pretty abysmal. Keep doing what you're doing! Don't stop! :-)

... No, in my opinion (which may not be worth much) there is one thing at least worse than having a meta-archive... and that's having ftp.python.org/pub/python/contrib/ ! No offense ment to anyone! But that place has become a terrible mess. And i hate README files!

I'll second your opinion. It has been a LONG time since I bothered to look in there. I go to the web now for Python code.

... Of course if there was a central archive, that takes care of finding things as well (assuming everyone wants to bother with going to the trouble of getting archived there). Still I must dissent. In retrospect, I am not fond of CPAN. I do not miss it. I do not consider it a model for emulation. It had perhaps some useful attributes----but I am (and hopefully I don't just say this because it is the nature of my-project-which-i-must-protect) genuinely in favour of decentralised resources. I think it's more encouraging to people to directly and easily control and release their stuff (and for those who want to upload somewhere there is still ftp.python.org!) While there are certain weaknesses and logistic complications (and yeah, perhaps "mess" also!) it seems a much freer environment to me. Less stuffy, as it were. Less official! Perhaps my biases are showing a little too strongly. I find the rigidity of CPAN just a little too intimidating, in fact.

I argued the same topic (different approach, tho) on the trove-dev mailing list (archives at www.python.org/pipermail/trove-dev). Basically, I believe the current Internet user is looking for a Freshmeat-style index, rather than a sunsite-style repository. Repositories are passe, indexes are The Right And Just Way. :-) Anybody can get a web page and some disk space. Therefore, anybody can publish their code themselves -- there is no need for central repositories except to help out lazy people that won't publish thru a web page. (alright, maybe that's too strong, but I'm making a point here :-) The problem, of course, is finding all this stuff. IMO, you ought to look harder at the Freshmeat style of index. More of the work is pushed onto the author, rather than the site maintainer. The editors review each announcement or edit, but I don't think they personally clean up the database. (yes, I realize some of your efforts are due to "startup" rather than a plan to do ongoing maintenance)

... Already i note these quibles in the last few messages about version number parsing. When creating the Vaults of Parnassus database I had

I posted a little version number parser about a year ago, I think. It handles most forms of version numbers, returning a tuple that can be properly ordered (among the software's other releases using that version number pattern). If you need to parse version numbers, that's the function to use. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/