[Catalog-sig] What is the point of pythonpackages.com?

Yuval Greenfield ubershmekel at gmail.com
Tue Feb 7 23:29:15 CET 2012


On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 11:31 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de>wrote:

> > I'm talking about the scenario where the authors did get correct
> > information into the index, and
> > information such as package description, authors, classifiers etc are
> > still all correct, and the only thing that broke is
> > the download link. I.e. all the information *managed* by PyPI is
> > correct but what PyPI is pointing to isn't any more. This is an
> > incorrectness that isn't under PyPI's control. It's similar to the
> > situation where a website URL that a PyPI page points to breaking, but
> > with more serious consequences for tools. This is because release
> > files are a bit more like package metadata than they are like links.
>
> I agree that it's more serious to the users (although I find a stale
> home page or an incorrect contact email address fairly serious too).
>
> I still maintain that none of this incorrectness is PyPI's "fault",
> or that we should feel responsible for fixing it. It's just a storage
> of information, with no responsibility on python.org's side except to
> preserve the data (within legal and moral boundaries).
>
>
I think we all agree we should try and remove dead links or at least mark
them as such. Google/wikipedia/download.com/etc wouldn't serve dead links
in search results and I don't think we should treat PyPI as the Python
Packaging Archive.

I don't know how that can be done for contact email addresses but any url
pypi points to (package host or website) should be checked once in a while
imho.

Yuval
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/catalog-sig/attachments/20120208/c2a8251c/attachment.html>


More information about the Catalog-SIG mailing list