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

Extend "Hosting your own index" guide to provide an example for pypiserver use #1467

Open
chrysle opened this issue Dec 22, 2023 · 6 comments

Comments

@chrysle
Copy link
Contributor

chrysle commented Dec 22, 2023

I believe pypiserver is a simple and efficient way to get an own index server running, and should deserve a recommendation and usage example. The guide is rather thin, in any case.

@webknjaz
Copy link
Member

I don't think that one is popular. I'm mostly hearing of devpi and I also used dumb-pypi for static sites in the past. Also, PyPUG is probably not the right place for putting documentation of third party projects. We can link a few possibilities, but that's it.

@chrysle
Copy link
Contributor Author

chrysle commented Dec 22, 2023

I don't think that one is popular.

Don't know how to assess that properly, but it's easily configurable and I thought it might be worth a paragraph.

For example, Pipenv uses it for its test suite and the Hitchhiker's Guide introduces it.

@webknjaz
Copy link
Member

Okay.. It might be somewhat popular, it seems:

We use devpi in the integration tests for https://github.com/pypa/gh-action-pypi-publish, by the way.

But I still don't think that we should hosts project-specific docs within PyPUG.

@chrysle
Copy link
Contributor Author

chrysle commented Dec 22, 2023

But I still don't think that we should hosts project-specific docs within PyPUG.

Then I see only the solution that never fails: We must integrate pypiserver into PyPA!

No, seriously, I wasn't aware of that guideline. We could add a paragraph comparing some of the most popular solutions, then... ?

@webknjaz
Copy link
Member

I think it's common sense — why would we want to maintain (a potentially outdated/incorrect) copy somebody else's docs? It's a duplication of effort.

@chrysle
Copy link
Contributor Author

chrysle commented Dec 22, 2023

I just revisited #1366 and #1367. What do you think about those?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants