Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reworded the section about predictable URLs #5536

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Apr 24, 2023
Merged

Conversation

flying-sheep
Copy link
Contributor

@flying-sheep flying-sheep commented Mar 7, 2019

In #5535 it became clear that the current state of the documentation misleads people into thinking the predictable URL API might me some kind of barely maintained step child instead of the valuable asset for Linux package maintainers that it is.

Rendered

@flying-sheep
Copy link
Contributor Author

I’m confused about python_tag (the specified part in wheels) vs python_version (the part in the URLs after /packages/ that’s mostly “source”, or the python_tag, but sometimes something else entirely)

Is there a spec for this? Why do some wheels have some freeform stuff in there even though their python_tag is correct?

  • coverage-config-reload-plugin has python_tag=py2.py3 and python_version=any
  • numericalunits and tbvaccine have python_tag=py2.py3 and python_version=3.6

Is that a bug in the consistency check of PyPI? Or is it allowed to have differing versions there?

There needs to be one of two things:

  1. Either I need an explanation for python_version
  2. Or we need to patch the redirection so it also makes wheels available under /packages/{python_tag}/... instead of having to figure out their bogus python_version.

@flying-sheep
Copy link
Contributor Author

flying-sheep commented Mar 7, 2019

PS: the travis failure is a bug in the validation: :pep:`number#anchor` is valid syntax.

@pradyunsg
Copy link
Contributor

Sounds like a good bugfix PR for doc8. :)

@brainwane brainwane added the needs discussion a product management/policy issue maintainers and users should discuss label Mar 14, 2019
Base automatically changed from master to main January 21, 2021 18:39
@miketheman
Copy link
Member

#Triage
Surfacing this for reevaluation. Generally speaking, the docs update seems reasonable, but we've since changed CI providers since this was authored, and there's some conflicts that need to be resolved.

@flying-sheep are you still interested in making this contribution?

@miketheman miketheman added the awaiting-response PRs and issues that are awaiting author response label Dec 18, 2022
@flying-sheep flying-sheep requested a review from a team as a code owner December 20, 2022 12:22
@flying-sheep
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sure, why not!

@miketheman miketheman removed the awaiting-response PRs and issues that are awaiting author response label Dec 20, 2022
In pypi#5535 it became clear that the current state of the documentation misleads people into thinking the predictable URL API might me some kind of barely maintained step child instead of the valuable asset for Linux package maintainers that it is.
@di di enabled auto-merge (squash) April 24, 2023 22:35
@di di merged commit 8fe034f into pypi:main Apr 24, 2023
16 checks passed
@flying-sheep flying-sheep deleted the patch-1 branch April 25, 2023 12:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation needs discussion a product management/policy issue maintainers and users should discuss
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants