hupili’s Python utilities
Why making a utility repo?
Reduce repeated works.
Code snippets and notes are not enough to memorize things.
Make it easier to synchronize between my machines.
Why not call it “utility”, “utils”, “pyutils”?
Some of the names are taken, including old repos and new repos.
I believe different people have different collections. I don’t want to mess the public index. Probably utility will be used later for more important purpose?
Why the module files are prefixed with “pl”?
Some names are taken by the standard libs and my editor’s plugin complains. e.g. time.
1 maintainer
Metadata
1 maintainer
Release files for hupili 0.2.0
For a detailed explanation of source distributions (sdists) and built distributions (wheels), please see the package formats documentation.
Source distribution (sdist)
| File | Size | Uploaded | Provenance | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| hupili-0.2.0.tar.gz | 1.7 kB | Without provenance | Details |
Release files / hupili-0.2.0.tar.gz
| Download URL | hupili-0.2.0.tar.gz |
|---|---|
| Size | 1.7 kB |
| Tags | Source |
|
SHA-256 checksum How to use checksums |
f105eda4d78135542024d231284b43061fc4a043423d3ea4a668b1de47aa236d
|
|
BLAKE2b-256 checksum How to use checksums |
e07cf970f56d6e864ccca77d08889c0ed9ea0d79d29a2507d0832c2e4bbf4276
|
| Upload date | |
|
Uploaded using Trusted Publishing? What is trusted publishing? |
No |
Security for hupili 0.2.0
Provenance
Provenance describes where a file came from. On PyPI, provenance is shared via attestations, which provide a verifiable record of the build or publishing details. View details, limitations and caveats.
No provenance found
None of the files in this release were uploaded with provenance metadata.
A note on package security
PyPI is a repository for distributing packages, not a service for auditing them. While third-party security researchers and our staff do their best to detect and remove malicious packages, PyPI cannot guarantee the quality, security or suitability of any given package.
