[Python-Dev] This Project Has Not Released Any Files

Tim Peters tim_one@email.msn.com
Wed, 18 Oct 2000 17:34:38 -0400

[Martin v. Loewis]
> What is the reason for not publishing Python 2.0 on SF for download?

From BeOpen.com's POV, so long as they were paying major bills, they would
rather have download traffic tickle their ad banners than SF's ad banners.

From our (PythonLabs) POV, another publishing site is more work, and one URL
is about as good as any other.  Besides, rising to the top of SF's "most
active" list has not been an explicit life goal for any of us <wink>.

> SF certainly wouldn't be the primary source, but I think at least the
> source distribution should be available there, with the release notes
> telling where to get binary distributions (BeOpen, ActiveState, who
> else?)

I didn't see any advantage claimed for publishing on SF.  Without an
advantage, the work/benefit ratio is infinite.