[Catalog-sig] readthedocs.org or packages.python.org?

[Jesse Noller]

On Wednesday, February 6, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Lennart Regebro wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Vinay Sajip <vinay_sajip at yahoo.co.uk (mailto:vinay_sajip at yahoo.co.uk)> wrote:
> > Lennart Regebro <regebro <at> gmail.com (http://gmail.com)> writes:
> > > 
> > > Packages.python.org (http://Packages.python.org) support any HTML, I think, right?
> > > 
> > > That said, is anyone using it without with Sphinx?
> > 
> > That's not the only difference: it also requires that your project be in a
> > public Mercurial or Git repository that RTD can pull from. For almost all cases,
> > this is fine - but for me, for at least one project, I can't use RTD. That's
> > because the project (python-gnupg) doesn't have its own repository, it's part of
> > a larger repository that can't be public. The project is open source and I could
> > of course pull it into a separate repository, but I would lose the history
> > without doing a bit of work to try and keep it. I may well undertake this at
> > some point, but until then, RTD is not usable for that project. And so it may be
> > for other projects too, but for different reasons.
> > 
> > While I find the RTD integration with DVCS very convenient, I like the fact
> > about packages.python.org (http://packages.python.org) that you can just upload a directory of documentation,
> > and there is distutils support for this. If we were to lose packages.python.org (http://packages.python.org)
> > in favour of RTD, then unless RTD accepted HTML bundles like packages.python.org (http://packages.python.org)
> > does, distutils/Distribute/setuptools would presumably break when one tried to
> > do an upload_doc.
> 
> 
> 
> So all-in-all, if we marget packages.p.o. and RTD somehow, then the
> functionality of RTD must be enhanced, which may not be what the RTD
> people want?

I am sure I can talk to the maintainers (we're friends) and if anything, happily pay them for the support we need.