WARNING: THIS SITE IS A MIRROR OF GITHUB.COM / IT CANNOT LOGIN OR REGISTER ACCOUNTS / THE CONTENTS ARE PROVIDED AS-IS / THIS SITE ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DISPLAYED CONTENT OR LINKS / IF YOU FOUND SOMETHING MAY NOT GOOD FOR EVERYONE, CONTACT ADMIN AT ilovescratch@foxmail.com
Skip to content

Conversation

@andrewtruong
Copy link

Hi, I'd like to un-archive the weave feedstock and make me the new maintainer.

The old project called weave was archived per #778. The new project, now called weave on pypi, would like to start publishing on conda.

@andrewtruong andrewtruong requested a review from a team as a code owner October 21, 2025 15:12
Copy link
Member

@beckermr beckermr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It appears that you'd like to point the same name to a completely different package? We do not allow that on conda-forge.

@h-vetinari
Copy link
Member

I think in this case it would be reasonable to follow PyPI and allow reuse of weave as a package name.

@beckermr
Copy link
Member

We have not allowed this on conda-forge (except for a few very special instances) since it has the potential to break things in unintuitive ways.

@andrewtruong
Copy link
Author

I understand your concern.

The pypi package name changed over 2 years ago, and the conda package has not had any updates in almost 6 years. I think we can draw a clean line separating the old vs. new packages by version number -- namely anything weave>=0.20.0 is the new package, and below is the old package (the latest version of the old package is 0.17.0)

@beckermr
Copy link
Member

We've had some internal discussions and are moving ahead with a plan on this. More later.

@andrewtruong
Copy link
Author

Thank you!

@andrewtruong
Copy link
Author

Hi @beckermr , any updates? Is there anything I can do to help?

@jaimergp
Copy link
Member

xref conda-forge/cfep#64

@andrewtruong
Copy link
Author

Hey folks, just wanted to check in here. It seems like the CFEP above is good? Is there anything stopping us from unarchiving this?

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants