[Catalog-sig] PyPI and PEP 381

["Martin v. Löwis"]

David Lyon wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 00:07:27 +0100, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de>
> wrote:
> 
>> Thanks. Now I would need two things:
>> 1. a public statement by somebody that this is the protocol they would
>>    actually want to use. I still don't see the need for mirroring, so
>>    I would provide it independent of mirroring.
> 
> There are consumers for this sure.
> 
> Linux package maintainers, custom python distributions etc.

Which one specifically?

>> 2. a recommendation what specific hub to use. I would prefer not to run
>>    my own, let alone implementing a hub as part of PyPI (although
>>    contributions are welcome).
> 
> Jabberd as an example is not overly complex to setup or administer.

Hmm. AFAICT, jabberd does not support pubsubhubbub.

> 
> You can control access with username/password pairs. Or allow self
> registration.

See, this is precisely the kind of stuff I don't have *any* cycles for.
I don't want to run another service, and worry about people using it
to break into python.org.

>> I would then probably setup an RSS feed of the last hour of changes,
>> and arrange to ping the hub.
> 
> RSS are always open HTTP connections.

Sorry, but that's how pubsubhubbhub works.

> Perphaps you could accomplish everything that you want with
> RSS.

I didn't propose RSS. Robert Kern did, by proposing to use
pubsubhubbub (although the specification seems to favor ATOM).

> The "community" would be more impressed with a jabberd style
> implementation as it can enable two-way communication.

The "community" just proposed the contrary (more precisely,
three different people proposing three different technologies).
Please don't speak for anybody but yourself (unless you are
*certain* that you have been authorized to do so).

Regards,
Martin