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

[Greg Stein]

On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 05:34:38PM -0400, Tim Peters wrote:
> [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>.

And here is where the larger community can help. Presuming that non-admins
can publish files, then we could take on the burden of publishing the files
via SF.

> > 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.

Work == 0 for you guys, presuming that non-admins can publish.

[ off to take a look... ]

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/