PEP 541 Request: sashimi

[solstag]

Project to be claimed

sashimi: https://pypi.org/project/sashimi

Your PyPI username

solstag: https://pypi.org/user/solstag

Reasons for the request

I've been using this name for my project for a few years now (see for ex. https://docs.cortext.net/sashimi/). I've finally decided to polish and publish it on pypi, but found the name is being squatted.

Maintenance or replacement?

Replacement

Source code repositories URLs

No source code is available for the current project, the link to github points to a 404 and the "package" has no functionality.

Source code for my project can be found here: https://gitlab.com/solstag/sashimi.

Contact and additional research

I did not contact the owner since this is an invalid package.

Code of Conduct

• [X] I agree to follow the PSF Code of Conduct

[solstag]

Ni! Hello folks. Any chance this may get some attention? It has now been another year and nothing has changed regarding the hoarding of the name. Cheers and thanks, ale .~´

[encukou]

We are working to contact the owner.

Disclaimer: We are providing support to the PyPI Administrators to validate this request and make a recommendation on the outcome and actions to be taken. Final determination will be made by the PyPI Administrators when our process is complete.

[solstag]

Ni! Understood. And thanks, I appreciate your work. .~´

[encukou]

Hello, The project recently had a new release. Apparently the current owner wants to continue using it. Unfortunately we can't transfer the project. You'll need to find another name.

[solstag]

Hello @encukou , @ambv

I don't understand the decision, and I would like to request a more careful review.

The supposed "project" has been literally squatting the name for years and makes a "release" only after you folks contact the owner. As far as I can tell this is obviously and blatantly what PEP 541 exist to counter, not what it exists to validate.

Moreover, not that it should matter, but said release is pretty much a placeholder, as one can note by peeking at the supposed code in it.

Again, I would like to kindly request that my issue be reviewed with attention and respect for PEP 541.

Best regards, and at your disposal.

[encukou]

We won't be able to look at this for a month, but I'll re-open and we'll discuss afterwards.

I can add some explanation for my part of the evaluation. The most relevant part of the PEP is here:

The maintainers of the Package Index are not arbiters in disputes around active projects. [...] None of the following qualify for package name ownership transfer: [...] 2. User A owns a project X outside the Package Index. User B creates a package under the name X on the Index. After some time, User A wants to publish project X on the Index but realizes name is taken. This is true even if User A’s project X gains notability and the User B’s project X is not notable.

For name-squatting:

A project published on the Package Index meeting ANY of the following is considered invalid and will be removed from the Index: [...]

• project is name squatting (package has no functionality or is empty);

That applied for sashimi 0.0.0 (which only has print('hi'), and project structure/metadata). The new releases have a “saliency model”. Whatever that is, and however incomplete/buggy it is, it does look like it has functionality.

[solstag]

Ni! Hi @encukou . Thanks for the reopen. I am aware of those details and have not requested a transfer based on having more notability.

As I said in my initial request over a year ago: "No source code is available for the current project, the link to github points to a 404 and the "package" has no functionality.". We both agree that this is a perfect fit to the definition of name squatting in PEP 541. And this has been the situation for 3 years, so it is not in any way a hasty judgement.

That the person pushes some couple hundred lines of broken code in response to being warned they've been caught squatting in no way changes the fact that the person was squatting when I placed my request, and remained squatting for over a year until the they learned there was a risk of losing the name.

In fact, this is exactly what you'd expect from someone acting in bad faith.

I understand that PEP 541 request must be handled carefully, and of course my view is going to be biased, but no matter how much effort I put I can't see any nuance in the present situation.

Thank you again for your attention, and best regards.

[encukou]

You're right that this is borderline namesquatting, but our rules (PEP 541) don't allow removing this package: it has some functionality and the owner is active.

Please choose a different name for your project.

[solstag]

I would just like to note, for the record:

• My request is not about the project being abandoned, it is about it being invalid, so it's not about activity.
• The package had zero functionality at the time I placed this request and for years after that. And it still has no actual functionality, even after you notified the owner, not that this should even matter.
• Therefore, in my understanding, this is not borderline, this is very clear name squatting.

My feeling is that if there's some reason you folks don't want to apply PEP 541, you could just change the PEP or be open about that.

[ambv]

My feeling is that if there's some reason you folks don't want to apply PEP 541, you could just change the PEP or be open about that.

You're responsible for your own feelings. The truth of the matter is that we have no horse in this race. We don't know you, we don't know the current maintainer of the current project. We are just trying to help. We will not be applying the PEP to any case that's not clear-cut in our eyes. There is much more possible damage from overzealous intervention compared to leaving a project on the package index that's not high value.

[solstag]

I see your point and I have always tried to communicate respectfully assuming that everyone has just been trying to help. I am naturally partial in the matter and I have little experience with PEP 541.

I did decide to spell out my feelings, after putting them in context and making it clear that's what they were. I consider it sometimes better to communicate than to hold our grudges to ourselves. I apologize if that came across as some sort of lack of respect for encukou's and your work.

Thanks for taking the time to respond