Thanks for the warm -and quick- welcome!
I think it probably makes the most sense to just point to the most widely accepted implementation
I agree in principle, but from an outsiders perspective the PEP for the simple API gives it more standing than the non-standardized JSON API. In essence the existence of PEP 503 makes it harder to argument in favour of implementing both the simple and the JSON APIs.
I’m curious what specifically the discrepancy/bug is here
This is a very pertinent question . As I recall it was
pip search (which I know has a colourful history) which was being used as part of the API of ensurepip-upgrade (which I no longer use, and prefer a deterministic approach to upgrading ensurepip - but that is a whole other thread ).
honestly, they just proxy through to PyPI and should re-write a few URLs
I was (unintentionally) being very disingenuous here as the software also implements a repository service as well as a proxy. So really, to support the JSON API properly they’d need to implement the JSON API for their stored artefacts too.
thus the current API probably shouldn’t be considered “standardized”
To what extent is this a problem? In the thread I linked you said that "pretty much nothing uses
/simple/", which at the time of reading I read as “Simple API”, but upon reflection I guess you literally meant that endpoint (which lists all packages on PyPI in a non-paginated form, and is extremely slow).
Given pretty-much everything else “just works” with pip with a Nexus-based index, perhaps pip is only using the JSON API for search, and everything else is a specific endpoint of the simple API (just not the top level one