On Wed, Jul 5, 2023, 19:06 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jul 2023 at 03:57, James Addison via Python-ideas
<python-ideas@python.org> wrote:
> I also agree with a later reply about avoiding the murkier side of blockchains / etc.  That said, it seems to me (again, sample size one anecdata) that creating a more levelled playing field for package publication could benefit from the use of some distributed technologies.  Even HTTP mirrors are, arguably, a basic form of that.. there's at least one question related to recency of data, though.  Delaying availability of a package to an audience -- if it's important enough -- could under some circumstances become effectively similar to censorship.

A blockchain won't solve anything here. It would be completely and
utterly impractical to put the packages themselves into a blockchain,
so all you'd have is the index, and that means it's just a bad version
of PyPI's own single-page index.

Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-leave@python.org
Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/PTIS3HZHJSFV7ETWE7UP4HKXS4WN2OEO/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Mostly agreed.  A distributed hash table or similar, though, could be appropriate in combination with ideas similar to the accreting layers of self-reinforcing consensus that some blockchain technologies provide.