[Numpy-discussion] NEP 36- fair play (was: request to remove the numpy-aarch64 package from PyPI)

Matti Picus matti.picus at gmail.com
Tue Jun 15 03:38:42 EDT 2021

On 14/6/21 11:03 pm, Stefan van der Walt wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2021, at 18:21, Charles R Harris wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 10:47 AM Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com 
>> <mailto:ralf.gommers at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>     FYI, I noticed this package that claimed to be maintained by us:
>>     https://pypi.org/project/numpy-aarch64/
>>     <https://pypi.org/project/numpy-aarch64/>. That's not ours, so I
>>     tried to contact the author (no email provided, but guessed the
>>     same username on GitHub) and asked to remove it:
>>     https://github.com/tomasriv/DNA_Sequence/issues/1
>>     <https://github.com/tomasriv/DNA_Sequence/issues/1>.
>>     There are a very large number of packages with "numpy" in the
>>     name on PyPI, and there's no way we can audit/police that
>>     effectively, but if it's a rebuild that pretends like it's
>>     official then I think it's worth doing something about. It could
>>     contain malicious code for all we know.
>> That is a pretty misleading package description, would have fooled me 
>> if I didn't know better. I didn't get the impression it was 
>> malicious, but still . . .
> Maybe now is a good time to move to accept:
> https://numpy.org/neps/nep-0036-fair-play.html 
> <https://numpy.org/neps/nep-0036-fair-play.html>
> Stéfan

Having just re-read the NEP, I think the Motivation section should 
mention name re-use: "Additionally, we wish to reduce confusion when 
package names imply they are sanctioned or maintained by NumPy". Other 
than that it looks good to me. Do you want to make a PR to add the 
discussion and change the status, and notify the list of your intention 
to accept it?


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list