[Catalog-sig] [PSF-Board] Troubled by changes to PyPI usage agreement

[M.-A. Lemburg]

Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 8:06 PM, M.-A. Lemburg <mal at egenix.com> wrote:
>> > Steve Holden wrote:
>>> >> Agreed. Until this issue is resolved we can't allow (public) third-party
>>> >> mirrors. Given the recent adverse reactions to PyPi changes we should be
>>> >> careful not to cause any further offense.
>> >
>> > Perhaps the PSF should start creating a list of official public
>> > mirrors. We would then need to add a mention of this to the PyPI
>> > usage license I posted.
>> >
>> > Setting up an official mirror would then require approval of the PSF
>> > and allow the PSF to monitor and maintain a good quality service.
>> > Package manager tools could then use the list of official mirrors
>> > to find a nearby mirror for downloading the package information.
> That's basically what I've proposed in PEP 381 :
> 
> 1/ the mirror maintainer proposes its mirror in the Catalog mailing-list
> 2/ if it's accepted, it's added in the list of IPs in the pypi DNS
> 3/ client tools like PIP develop a geloc feature to use the nearest
> mirror, by getting the list of IPs
> 
> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0381/#how-a-client-can-use-pypi-and-its-mirrors
> 
> I could add in the PEP the fact that the mirror has to be accepted by the PSF

Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Tarek Ziadé <ziade.tarek at gmail.com> wrote:
> [..]
>> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0381/#how-a-client-can-use-pypi-and-its-mirrors
>>
>> I could add in the PEP the fact that the mirror has to be accepted by the PSF
> 
> See also : http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0381/#mirror-listing-and-registering

Any such addition will have to go by the PSF since the PSF runs the
official PyPI index.

Note that this is only required for PyPI mirrors that are made public,
ie. redistribute the PyPI data without the PSF being directly involved.

Background: the change recently introduced on the PyPI registration
page does cover such redistributions by any user of PyPI, but that
change is controversial and, what's more important, does not cover
data uploaded to PyPI by users who registered before the change.

I'd like to get the wording on the terms changed to make the PSF
the only partner in the agreement and let it control the redistribution
terms - much like we do in the Python contribution forms.

Just to clarify: a private mirror would basically just be standard use
of the PyPI data without the redistribution part, so that use is fine
in all cases.

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com

Professional Python Services directly from the Source  (#1, Jan 20 2010)
>>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ...        http://www.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ...             http://zope.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ...        http://python.egenix.com/
________________________________________________________________________

::: Try our new mxODBC.Connect Python Database Interface for free ! ::::


   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/