Mailman 3 March 2026 - PyPA-Committers

VOTE: Moving pip-tools to PyPA
by Sviatoslav Sydorenko April 6, 2026

April 6, 2026

Hi PyPA committers, I'd like to open a vote on transferring pip-tools to the PyPA GitHub org: https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools This is a project that provides a way to generate constraint files and manage virtualenv pins. Sometimes, I call it "an early DIY lock files" implementation. It's used by Dependabot to upgrade requirement/constraint files and is a prior art for what's reimplemented in uv. It's spent most of its life in the Jazzband collaborative maintenance organisation that is getting shut down this year[1]. And so, naturally we're looking for a new home[2]. Since both Stephen and I (webknjaz and sirosen — the current project leads) are already a part of PyPA and it is a tool of the packaging realm, we feel it's a good idea to keep maintaining the project under the familiar umbrella. -- Warm regards, Sviatoslav Sydorenko [1]: https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/discussions/2353 [2]: https://jazzband.co/news/2026/03/14/sunsetting-jazzband

19 25

VOTE: adding pypi-publish to PyPA on GitLab
by William Woodruff April 2, 2026

April 2, 2026

Hi PyPA committers, I'd like to open a vote on transferring pypi-publish to the PyPA GitLab org (*not* GitHub): https://gitlab.com/trailofbits/pypi-publish For a bit of context: pypi-publish is a GitLab "component", which is roughly analogous to a GitHub Action. Trail of Bits has created this component as a way to streamline GitLab usage of Trusted Publishing and attestations, similar to how pypa/gh-action-pypi-publish has streamlined usage of both on GitHub. If accepted, I would be a primary maintainer on pypi-publish, along with my co-maintainer and colleague Facundo Tuesca (@facutuesca on both GitHub and GitLab). Separately, the astute observer will note that PyPA doesn't have an official GitLab org yet. Ee is currently working on having gitlab.com/pypa released to the PyPA, but in the meantime there's a "holding pattern" organization with a subgroup for PyPA here: https://gitlab.com/python-software-foundation https://gitlab.com/python-software-foundation/pypa Best, William Woodruff

13 19

Adding new maintainers without PyPA owners
by Bernat Gabor March 30, 2026

March 30, 2026

Hey per https://www.pypa.io/en/latest/members/#individual-membership project maintainers should be allowed to add additional maintainers without needing owner input. This seems impossible today for two reasons: - I can't add someone to this e-mail list, - I can only add users to the maintainers group who are already part of the PyPA. [image: image.png] What am I missing here? Is the pypa document written in a way that's not possible to operate? Is also unclear per that document what channel one should communicate with admins. Thanks!

11 22

RFC: amending PyPA governance to permit for use of PyPA funds
by Richard Si March 23, 2026

March 23, 2026

Hi all, If you don't know who I am. I've been a committer of the pip project since 2025 and a PyPA member for even longer through bandersnatch. As you likely know, PyPA is a fiscal sponsoree of the Python Software Foundation. This enables the PyPA to collect donations through the PSF. However, even with PEP 609 accepted, there is no established process to allow the PyPA to *use* any of its funds. Over the years, the PyPA has collected funds from GitHub Sponsors, Tidelift, and thanks.dev. Some of the Tidelift revenue is routed to the individual project maintainers as per existing agreements, but otherwise, our funds are mostly sitting unused. PSF Accounting is unfortunately behind on our books, but as of March 31, 2025, the PyPA has ~63,000 USD in net assets. Our yearly revenues have fluctuated over the years, so it's hard to estimate, but on the *low* end, it seems like we're taking in ~6000 USD after current expenses. For context, the pip project is exploring the possibility of using PyPA funds to sponsor part-time contract development on pip. For this to be even administratively possible though, we need a mechanism for the PyPA to vote on whether to use its own money. While I'd prefer to keep the pip proposal under wraps until it is ready for feedback, I will share some details with y'all in the PyPA since it's relevant to the proposed amendment: - Sponsor me to work on pip on a contract part-time basis in Q3 2026 - ~1750 USD (or ~2400 CAD) over 11 weeks for 110 hours - I will work on a handful of high-value features and bugfixes, including - Improving pip's build isolation to use real virtual environments - Progress towards removing the legacy resolver (the original grant for the new resolver didn't result in the removal of the legacy resolver) - Improved errors - This will need to be investigated more carefully first, but likely work on configurable Index URL priority and a way to request --only-deps for a local project - General pip maintenance and development, modelled after the CPython DIR program The exact details are subject to change. (Yes, I know this mailing list is public. I'm just trying to not promise the world, i.e. DPO, everything when it's very possible that the pip proposal will fail at the pip core team stage.) I've thus drafted an amendment to PEP 609 that allows for votes on the use of PyPA funds. It's worth noting that under the fiscal sponsorship agreement, all disbursements are subject to final approval by the PSF. Since this is the first major amendment to PyPA's governance since the adoption of PEP 609, I thought I'd raise this for discussion before putting this amendment to a formal PyPA-committer vote. The details and discussion can be found on DPO: https://discuss.python.org/t/amending-pypa-governance-to-permit-for-use-of-… <https://discuss.python.org/t/amending-pypa-governance-to-permit-for-use-of-…> Your comments and feedback would be appreciated. *I ask that you send any replies to the DPO thread to avoid fragmenting the discussion.* All the best, *Richard Si *(he/him) GitHub: @ichard26

1 0