[Distutils] some questions about PEP470

[Donald Stufft]

On Oct 14, 2014, at 8:50 PM, Stefan Krah <stefankrah at freenet.de> wrote:

> Donald Stufft <donald <at> stufft.io> writes:
> 
>> If you're this upset over someone redistributing your work, then maybe
>> Open Source Software is the wrong hobby for you.
> 
> Usually one does not tell a core developer that his contributions are
> "a hobby".  I have contributed 40000+ lines of original, dense C code,
> backed by 100% code coverage and 30000+ lines of ACL2 proofs.

Uhh, maybe you’re misunderstanding the word hobby, unless you’re getting
paid for your OSS work you’re not doing it professionally. A hobby isn’t a
negative thing, until last December my OSS work was entirely a hobby too,
and it’s still a hobby in my spare time too.

> 
> These days it may be more productive to hack other people's brains and
> produce 10000+ tweets in order to have more political influence.

I’m not even sure what this is saying… Are you accusing me of hacking
people’s brains? If so I’m kind of impressed by what power you think I have.

> 
> 
> It's great that my code is distributed with Python.  Likewise, it was great
> to work with Matthias Klose and Hans-Peter Jansen to produce Debian, Ubuntu,
> and OpenSuse packages.  cdecimal is also distributed by NetBSD, ActiveState,
> continuum.io, and others.
> 
> 
> The difference here is that the above persons and entities respect people.
> They respect software.  The package maintainers are very competent and easy
> to work with.

If this is about m3-cdecimal, well your license doesn’t give it’s permissions out
only if the person is nice to you.

> 
> 
>> Nonetheless I told you how to get that remediated and as of yet I don't
>> see an open support request from you on it.
> 
> My interest in cleaning up PyPI is practically zero now.  In the end, who
> cares what m3-cdecimal was supposed to accomplish:  Maybe they wanted to
> teach me a lesson, maybe they were upset about a minor detail, maybe they
> have a zero-day exploit for tar and that's their delivery mode.

Ok, if you don’t care then I find it hard to care much about it either.

> 
> All I know is that they didn't even run ``make distclean'' before packaging,
> so some user info is present in config.log.
> 
> 
> Some problems can only be fixed by a curated distribution run by neutral 
> maintainers.

Sure.

> 
> 
>> I think you might want to rethink this strategy if it's your goal, unless
>> the view point you're trying to push is that I was right all along because
>> there are a number of people* who previously didn't think it was a big deal
>> but now agree with me since they couldn't install cdecimal because
> bytrereef.org
>> was down.
> 
> 
> Shrug.  This is more loss of interest than a strike!  Even it were a strike,
> the observation is not particularly interesting:  Any strike (think railway)
> potentially alienates some users.

Ok! Well a loss of interest makes for a good example too, so thanks!

> 
> Anyway, it will be kind of tough to force U.S. exceptionalism via the terms
> and conditions on an international body of authors if only uploaded packages
> are allowed.
> 

I’m not even sure what this is trying to say… How are our pretty simple ToS
some sort of US exceptionalism? 

> 
> 
> Stefan Krah
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Distutils-SIG maillist  -  Distutils-SIG at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig