[Distutils] Sooner or later, we're going to have to be more formal about how we name packages.

[holger krekel]

On Sun, Jun 02, 2013 at 17:26 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 5:10 PM, holger krekel <holger at merlinux.eu> wrote:
> > If pypi has no idea about namespaces (like i considered them in my other post)
> > then using namespaces do not really provide much.  Someone can still come along
> > and publish within that pseudo-namespace.  I would think the goal of
> > pypi-namespaces would be to give a group control over anything that's
> > released using it, allowing to communicate install-users certain guarantees.
> >
> > However, before further discussion i think there first needs to be more
> > reasoning and stating of practical problems with the current
> > anyone-can-register-anything-that's-not-taken model.
> 
> TUF actually has native support for prefix delegation, but actually
> *using* that is a long way down the todo list at the moment. Static
> dependency metadata publication and end-to-end signature support are
> well ahead of it and will likely keep us collectively busy for a while
> yet.

No worries, I understood already that it's not high on your list.  

I'd appreciate, however, if Jim or someone else could state the problems
with missing namespacing so we can start a discussion from there later.

Speaking of TUF: is there some kind of PEP like doc floating already?

cheers,
holger

> Cheers,
> Nick.
> 
> --
> Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
>