Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
PEP 752: Updates including co-authoring of the PEP (#4292)
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
Co-authored-by: Hugo van Kemenade <[email protected]>
  • Loading branch information
potiuk and hugovk authored Mar 8, 2025
1 parent 98b61f0 commit 5e68dde
Showing 1 changed file with 15 additions and 1 deletion.
16 changes: 15 additions & 1 deletion peps/pep-0752.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
PEP: 752
Title: Implicit namespaces for package repositories
Author: Ofek Lev <[email protected]>
Author: Ofek Lev <[email protected]>,
Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]>
Sponsor: Barry Warsaw <[email protected]>
PEP-Delegate: Dustin Ingram <[email protected]>
Discussions-To: https://discuss.python.org/t/63192
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -39,6 +40,9 @@ namespace. A few examples:
are prefixed by ``opentelemetry-`` with child prefixes in the form
``opentelemetry-<component>-<name>-``. The contrib packages live in a
central repository and they are the only ones with the ability to publish.
* `Apache Airflow <https://airflow.apache.org>`__ is a platform to programmatically
author, schedule and monitor workflows. It has providers, where each
provider package is prefixed by ``apache-airflow-providers-``.

__ https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-python
__ https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-python-contrib
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -93,6 +97,16 @@ similar characters but that is insufficient for these use cases.

__ https://github.com/pypi/warehouse/blob/8615326918a180eb2652753743eac8e74f96a90b/warehouse/migrations/versions/d18d443f89f0_ultranormalize_name_function.py#L29-L42

Another problem that namespacing would solve is the issue of choosing new names
for packages following the agreed patterns of naming. Often (this is the case
for Apache Airflow for example), there are public discussions that precede
the decision to create a new package. The decision is based on the agreed
name and follow the pattern of the existing packages. If more package names are
considered during the discussion, all the names have to be reserved via a PyPI
interface before the discussion is public, otherwise the names can be taken by
other users. This has happened in the past as explained
in the associated `discussion <https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-752-implicit-namespaces-for-package-repositories/63192/80>`__.

Rationale
=========

Expand Down

0 comments on commit 5e68dde

Please sign in to comment.