[Distutils] pip/warehouse feature idea: "help needed"

[Wes Turner]

On Apr 14, 2015 7:15 PM, "Nick Coghlan" <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 14 April 2015 at 11:19, Trishank Karthik Kuppusamy <trishank at nyu.edu>
wrote:
> > On 14 April 2015 at 11:16, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> >> I agree. Even something as simple as a boolean that triggers a banner
> >> saying "this project is looking for a new maintainer" would be useful
both
> >> from the perspective of project owners who want to move on or from the
> >> perspective of users who can't tell if a project is maintained based
on how
> >> long it has been since a project uploaded a new version (which is why I
> >> think someone suggested sending an annual email asking for a human
action to
> >> say "alive and kicking" to help determine if a project is completely
> >> abandoned).
> >
> > Yeah, I think Guido said something to this effect in his keynote.
>
> Yep, Guido's keynote was the genesis of the thread. For folks that
haven't seen it, the specific points of concern raised were:
>
> * seeking a new maintainer from amongst their users
> * seeking help with enabling Python 3 support
>
> Past suggestions for social features have related to providing users with
a standard way to reach maintainers and each other, and I'd prefer to leave
maintainers in full control of that aspect of the maintainer experience.
I'm not alone in feeling that way, hence why such features tend not to be
viewed especially positively.
>

If only there was a way to add RDFa metadata to the <a> tags in the HTML
output of a pypa/readme-rendered
long_description.

FOAF RDFa and/or a /users/<username>

https://warehouse.readthedocs.org/application/

Recently I learned about pyramid_autodoc.

> The one thing that *only* PyPI can provide is the combination of a
publication channel for maintainers to reach their user base without either
side needing to share contact information they aren't already sharing,
together with the creation of the clear understanding that providing
sustaining engineering for a piece of software represents a significant
time commitment that users benefiting from an open source maintainer's
generosity should respect.
>
> This thread regarding maintainers being able to more clearly communicate
maintenance status to users also relates to my blog post (
http://www.curiousefficiency.org/posts/2015/04/stop-supporting-python26.html)
regarding the fact that folks that:
>
> a) don't personally need to ensure software they maintain works on old
versions of Python; and
> b) aren't getting paid to ensure it works on old versions of Python;
> c) shouldn't feel obliged to provide such support for free
>
> Supporting legacy platforms is generally tedious work that isn't
inherently interesting or rewarding. Folks that want such legacy platform
support should thus be expecting to have to pay for it, and demanding it
for free is unreasonable.
>
> The perception that open source software is provided by magic internet
pixies that don't need to eat (or at the very least to be thanked for the
time their generosity has saved us) is unfortunately widespread and
pernicious [1], and PyPI is in a position to help shift that situation to
one where open source maintainers at least have the opportunity to clearly
explain the sustaining engineering model backing their software while
deflecting any criticism for the mere existence of such explanations onto
the PyPI maintainers rather than having to cope with any negative feedback
themselves.

So, is this a new ENUM field and something over and above mtime?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/attachments/20150416/9b65886d/attachment.html>