Namespaces for the Python Package Index

> Flat is better than nested.

Don't namespaces inherently introduce at least one level of nesting? Given that a DNS-based naming system will only give 2 levels of nesting in the common case (e.g. instead of "mynamespace.mypackage" you'll often end up with "tld.mydomain.mypackage"), is it that much of a big deal?

> Who is to say whether example.com will still be owned by the same people in a year or ten?

Won't you need a process for retiring/reusing namespaces anyway, if the original owner dies? How is this different?

> There needs to be a process for PyPI to reclaim an abandoned, compromised, or maliciously-used name,

Couldn't they just decide to block an arbitrary set of domains within PyPI? So they could reject packages for the "ru.h4x0r" namespace without involving IANA?

> I shouldn't need to buy a whole domain for a hobby project

Then you can use an un-namespaced package name, as you do now. It'll still the existing problems of collisions and squatting, but no worse than the situation currently is. Or PyPI could designate "local." as a private use namespace, mirroring the ".local" special use tld.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.local