[Python-Dev] Edits to Metadata 1.2 to add extras (optional dependencies)

["Martin v. Löwis"]

Am 28.08.12 17:38, schrieb R. David Murray:
> I don't recall any RFC registries that have expiration dates for
> entries.  Are there any?

The RFC database itself has expiration dates on specifications,
namely on I-D documents (internet drafts). The expire 6 months
after their initial publication, unless renewed.

For number assignments, the risk is that it will eventually run out
of numbers, in which case the protocol gets redesigned to increase
the number space.

For name assignments, the risk is that many similar-sounding elements
become used, and people accept that as a trade-off for the problems
you see in my expiration proposal.

The most popular name registry that does have expiration (despite
being hierarchical) is the DNS: you have to renew your names yearly
in most TLDs. People apparently accept the risk of confusion when
a domain expires and gets reused by someone else (and yes, the
DNS *is* an "RFC registry" :-)

> RFC registries usually have an organization vetting the entries,
> whereas it seems like we want this to be an open registry.

It very much depends. If you browse over the IANA registries, you find
that many parameter space require "IETF consensus", so they can be
extended only by RFC (similar to the status quo in metadata).

There are IANA registries that are open (e.g. SNMP, or MIME); things
are assigned in a first-come first-served manner (e.g. try to
find out what 1.3.6.1.4.1.18832.11.3 is :-)

> We could still have a (vetted) registry for "official" names, if
> we wanted.  That would follow the MIME model.  Or we can still have a
> separate registry, but only "qualified" (namespaced) names are open for
> anyone to register, without any expiration dates.

I don't consider it an absolute necessity that there is an expiration.
I do consider it a flaw in (some) IANA name registrations that there is
no expiration to them; I can report that people regularly want to
claim some PyPI package name on the basis that the original owner
didn't ever release any software under that name.

Regards,
Martin