New subject: PEP 386 status - last round here ?

30 Nov 2009

      At 09:15 PM 11/29/2009 +0100, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
...
2009/11/29 P.J. Eby :
[..]
...
WSGI and setuptools have been widely adopted in spite of their
technical and
...
ideological flaws, because they had good incentive engineering.
Or, in other words, because practicality beats purity, every single time.
Do you mean here that this independently-created standard, this good
incentive engeneering a.k.a.
Setuptools, is doomed not to evolve anymore ?   e.g. to adapt its
standard to a common standard that is going to raise and be added in
stldib at some point ?
I'm saying that ignoring backwards compatibility (as MAL and Ben have 
proposed) is bad incentive engineering.

I don't have any disagreement with what you're doing wrt PEP 386, 
btw; we already had all the technical issue discussion necessary back 
when you first wrote it.  I've just been chiming in on  a couple of 
threads where people have proposed changes that would break backward 
compatibility and present user experience.

Re: [Distutils] PEP 386 status - last round here ?

P.J. Eby

Ben Finney

M.-A. Lemburg

Floris Bruynooghe

tags

participants (4)