[Catalog-sig] permissive trove classification

[Tarek Ziadé]

Doug Hellmann wrote:
> 
> Offering a warning and accepting the known categories seems like a  
> reasonable compromise.  Is it an error if there are no known  
> categories in the list?
> 

Well if all classifiers are unknown from any server, this would just not do
anything on those
servers. Each server takes care of its trove and browse the classifiers sent
by the package
to pick the one it knows. It means that if you made a mistake on the
category name intended
for a given server, it will not raise an error and pop a warning.

Let's take an example: I have a server that deals with Zope packages. The
trove for PyPI is:

  Development Status :: 5 - Production/Stable
  Intended Audience :: Developers
  License :: OSI Approved :: Zope Public License
  Programming Language :: Python
  Topic :: Database
  Topic :: Software Development :: Libraries :: Python Modules
  Operating System :: Microsoft :: Windows
  Operating System :: Unix

Now my company "ACME", classifies packages in two categories: public,
private. It has a copy
of the PyPI trove too.
So my classifier become:

  ACME :: Visibility :: Public 
  Development Status :: 5 - Production/Stable
  Intended Audience :: Developers
  License :: OSI Approved :: Zope Public License
  Programming Language :: Python
  Topic :: Database
  Topic :: Software Development :: Libraries :: Python Modules
  Operating System :: Microsoft :: Windows
  Operating System :: Unix

When I upload it to the cheeseshop, I would expect something like this in
return:

Warning "ACME :: Visibility :: Public" classifier not found on the server
200 - OK 

When I upload in ACME:

200 - OK 
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/permissive-trove-classification-tp14504481p14511741.html
Sent from the Python - catalog-sig mailing list archive at Nabble.com.