[Distutils] a plea for backward-compatibility / smooth transitions

Paul Moore p.f.moore at gmail.com
Mon Jul 29 19:18:00 CEST 2013

On 29 July 2013 18:01, Tres Seaver <tseaver at palladion.com> wrote:

> I think we are going to be in a much better place for all that, but let's
> not deny the pain involved for *everybody* in getting there.

Agreed. I think the goal is valid, and the approach is fine. But we need to
do a better job in managing people's expectations. I'd like to see a
roadmap of the various changes planned, as well as some sort of explanation
of how each of the changes contributes towards the end goal.

Personally, none of the changes have detrimentally affected me, so my
opinion is largely theoretical. But even I am getting a little frustrated
by the constant claims that "what we have now is insecure and broken, and
must be fixed ASAP". The reality is that everything's more or less OK -
there's a risk, certainly, and it could be severe, but many, many people
are routinely using PyPI all the time without issues. And telling them that
they are wrong to do so, or that they are being extremely naive over
security, isn't helping.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20130729/9b60a770/attachment.html>

More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list