Mathieu Dupuy wrote:

A python representative (like Guido himself) should contact Github to obtain coordinates of the owner...

...and then order a drone strike on him? -- Greg

Ahah. Obtaining his electronic coordinates like email to gently ask him to pull it down by himself (otherwise we open fire). Because having Github suddenly destroying the repo, even though the man probably forgot about its existence might be a bit rude from the polite people python developers are. 2016-02-16 4:27 UTC+08:00, Oleg Broytman :

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 09:16:56AM +1300, Greg Ewing wrote:

...

Mathieu Dupuy wrote:

...

A python representative (like Guido himself) should contact Github to obtain coordinates of the owner...

...and then order a drone strike on him?

Yes, and then pry the repo from his cold dead fingers.

Well, I hope prying can be done without striking first. ;-)

...

-- Greg

Oleg. -- Oleg Broytman http://phdru.name/ phd@phdru.name Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/deronnax%40gmail.com

Hi all,

On Feb 27, 2016, at 14:21, Alexander Walters wrote:

Can we even ask github to pull it down and reasonably expect them to comply? Their entire model is built on everyone forking everyone else.

Why the model is everyone forking, some of the help page of GitHub actually tell you to contact GitHub support, like if you desire to "detach" a fork. Every reasonable requests I made to GitHub and the few interactions I had with the support always went well. This did include asking GitHub to contact user as their pages were confusing, and might be misleading others. So I would suggest 1) asking GitHub to contact author, potentially forwarding him/her a message from this list asking him/her to bring that down or transfer the control to you. That should be easy to do as it will not force GitHub to provide anyone with the emails of the the owner of python-git. 2) in the case of no response from author ask politely GitHub that the repo is confusing for user, and ask what they can do about that. 3) If still nothing can be done make a DMCA request. You can likely argue that the logo/name are used without PSF content. https://help.github.com/articles/dmca-takedown-policy/ https://help.github.com/articles/dmca-takedown-policy/ This would likely have more impact if sent from someone part of https://github.com/python https://github.com/python -- M

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 4:46 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:

Although I don't see much confusion; there's bound to be hundreds of forks of CPython, if not already, then definitely once we move to GitHub.

Forks made within the GitHub interface aren't usually confusing. Up the top of this repo, you can see where its upstream is, and therefore where you would go to find the official version of this project: https://github.com/Rosuav/appension So a fork-esque that predates the official repo is a different beast. +1 for asking GitHub to contact the owner, since it's not intrinsically obvious who's maintaining that. ChrisA

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 5:07 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:

On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 at 09:58 Chris Angelico wrote:

...

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 4:46 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:

...

Although I don't see much confusion; there's bound to be hundreds of forks of CPython, if not already, then definitely once we move to GitHub.

Forks made within the GitHub interface aren't usually confusing. Up the top of this repo, you can see where its upstream is, and therefore where you would go to find the official version of this project:

https://github.com/Rosuav/appension

So a fork-esque that predates the official repo is a different beast. +1 for asking GitHub to contact the owner, since it's not intrinsically obvious who's maintaining that.

Since this isn't being pushy I'm +1 as well. But who's going to ask?

Someone who has the authority to represent Python, I hope. A member of the PSF board? ChrisA

On 28.02.2016 18:46, Georg Brandl wrote:

On 02/27/2016 11:45 PM, Matthias Bussonnier wrote:

...

Hi all,

...

On Feb 27, 2016, at 14:21, Alexander Walters mailto:tritium-list@sdamon.com> wrote:

Can we even ask github to pull it down and reasonably expect them to comply? Their entire model is built on everyone forking everyone else.

Why the model is everyone forking, some of the help page of GitHub actually tell you to contact GitHub support, like if you desire to "detach" a fork.

Every reasonable requests I made to GitHub and the few interactions I had with the support always went well. This did include asking GitHub to contact user as their pages were confusing, and might be misleading others.

So I would suggest

1) asking GitHub to contact author, potentially forwarding him/her a message from this list asking him/her to bring that down or transfer the control to you. That should be easy to do as it will not force GitHub to provide anyone with the emails of the the owner of python-git.

2) in the case of no response from author ask politely GitHub that the repo is confusing for user, and ask what they can do about that.

These are both fine. Although I don't see much confusion; there's bound to be hundreds of forks of CPython, if not already, then definitely once we move to GitHub.

...

3) If still nothing can be done make a DMCA request. You can likely argue that the logo/name are used without PSF content. https://help.github.com/articles/dmca-takedown-policy/

Please no. There is absolutely no call using such a blunt instrument, just for a case of minor inconvenience. It could also be blown up into a PR disaster, probably rightly so.

I frankly don't understand what all the fuzz is about. The repo in question hasn't been touched in 7 years. It refers to Python 2.7 alpha 0. It also clearly reads "Unofficial Python SVN auto-updating mirror", so there's no confusion either. The talk about DMCA requests really doesn't apply. Python is open-source. Anyone can fork it, at any version they like, as long as the license is respected. The trademark use is also perfectly in line with our TM policy. The logo is a bit blurred, but that's really the only nit I could find. Asking the owner to take the repo down is still a good thought, but there's definitely nothing wrong with it per se. -- Marc-Andre Lemburg eGenix.com Professional Python Services directly from the Experts (#1, Feb 28 2016)

...

...

Python Projects, Coaching and Consulting ... http://www.egenix.com/ Python Database Interfaces ... http://products.egenix.com/ Plone/Zope Database Interfaces ... http://zope.egenix.com/

2016-02-19: Released eGenix PyRun 2.1.2 ... http://egenix.com/go88 ::: We implement business ideas - efficiently in both time and costs ::: eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH Pastor-Loeh-Str.48 D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611 http://www.egenix.com/company/contact/ http://www.malemburg.com/

On Feb 27 2016, at 2:47 pm, Ian Lee <ianlee1521@gmail.com> wrote:

Perhaps the better / easier solution is to promote the *real* “Sem-official read-only mirror of the Python Mercurial repository” [1] ? And perhaps this goes away entirely (in time) with PEP-512 [2]?

We will be working to promote the github repo, once the migration and PEP-512 is complete. Promoting semi-official repo in the interim (as opposed the active one in hg.python.org) does not seem like a good idea. This thread about claiming ownership of look-alike repo and we could concentrate our discussion on that alone. FWIW, that old look-alike (python-dev) repo as been in existence for years now and it has not caused any confusion. Once python moves to github, I think, we can ask for some logo or some kind of validation that will help users easily identify the originality. Thanks, Senthil