You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
What's the problem this feature will solve?
We've added the ability to yank releases, but some project owners/maintainers are still deleting releases when yanking would be more appropriate, as seems to have happened in jotes/django-cookies-samesite#40 with django-cookies-samesite pulling their 0.6.6 release. The current warning may not be dire enough:
Delete release 1.0.6.dev1?
This action cannot be undone!
You will not be able to re-upload a new distribution of the same type with the same version number. Consider yanking this release, making a new release or a post release instead.
Describe the solution you'd like @timabbottsuggested we strengthen the warning, "helping maintainers realize it's going to be a mistake before they do it by just documenting clearly what the impact is." @andersk suggested:
I think it might be helpful to add something like “Deletion will break any downstream projects relying on a pinned version of this package. It is intended as a last resort for legal issues or malware infection.”
I'm open to better, more concise wording. We could (in addition, or instead of this) link the word "yanking" to the FAQ entry and add more details and encouragement to that FAQ entry.
Additional context
Followup to #5837 and possibly related to #6091.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
What's the problem this feature will solve?
We've added the ability to yank releases, but some project owners/maintainers are still deleting releases when yanking would be more appropriate, as seems to have happened in jotes/django-cookies-samesite#40 with
django-cookies-samesite
pulling their 0.6.6 release. The current warning may not be dire enough:Describe the solution you'd like
@timabbott suggested we strengthen the warning, "helping maintainers realize it's going to be a mistake before they do it by just documenting clearly what the impact is." @andersk suggested:
I'm open to better, more concise wording. We could (in addition, or instead of this) link the word "yanking" to the FAQ entry and add more details and encouragement to that FAQ entry.
Additional context
Followup to #5837 and possibly related to #6091.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: