Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #20029 > unrolled thread

Re: Looking for PyPi 2.0...

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Looking for PyPi 2.0... Chris Rebert <clp2@rebertia.com> - 2012-02-08 09:47 -0800
    Re: Looking for PyPi 2.0... John Nagle <nagle@animats.com> - 2012-02-15 13:24 -0800
      Re: Looking for PyPi 2.0... Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-02-15 16:53 -0500

#20029 — Re: Looking for PyPi 2.0...

On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Nathan Rice
<nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> wrote:
> As a user:
> * Finding the right module in PyPi is a pain because there is limited,
> low quality semantic information, and there is no code indexing.
> * I have to install the module to examine it;  I don't need to look at
> docs all the time, sometimes I just want a
> package/class/function/method breakdown.
> * Given the previous point, having in-line documentation would be nice
> (for instance, just the output of .. automodule::)
> * Package usage/modification stats are not well exposed
> * No code metrics are available
> * I would like some kind of social service integration, for tagging
> and +1/likes.  I know ratings were scrapped (and they weren't that
> useful anyhow), but for example, if Armin Ronacher or Robert Kern
> thumbs up a module there is a pretty good chance I will be interested
> in it.
>
> As a developer:
> * I don't want to have to maintain my code repository and my package
> releases separately.  I want to let module repository know that my
> code repository exists, and that branches tagged as "release" should
> be made available.
> * I want to maintain one README.
>
>
> I don't like "someone needs to do this now" type posts but every time
> I use PyPi it infuratiates me.  I usually end up finding modules via
> Stack Overflow, which seems silly to me.

They don't have all the features you're looking for, but at least they
seem to be working on the problem:
http://crate.io

Cheers,
Chris

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#20476

On 2/8/2012 9:47 AM, Chris Rebert wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Nathan Rice
> <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> As a user:
>> * Finding the right module in PyPi is a pain because there is limited,
>> low quality semantic information, and there is no code indexing.

    CPAN does it right.  They host the code.  (PyPi is just a
collection of links).  They have packaging standards (PyPi
does not.)  CPAN tends not to be full of low-quality modules
that do roughly the same thing.

    If you want to find a Python module, Google is more useful
than PyPi.

				John Nagle

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#20481

> Hopefully soon crate.io will be useful for finding modules ;) I have plans
> for it to try and, encourage people to host their code and encourage
> following packaging standards. I'm currently focused mostly on the backend
> stability (e.g. getting it stable) but emphasizing things that are generally
> good for the packaging ecosystem is something I hope to do.

I think providing commit hooks for version control ala read the docs
is the #1 thing you could do in the short term to add a lot of value.
That would be enough for me to adopt the service :)

Nathan

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web