Re: [Python-Dev] Dropping __init__.py requirement for subpackages

On 4/26/06, Guido van Rossum wrote:

On 4/26/06, Benji York wrote:

...

Guido van Rossum wrote:

...

So I have a very simple proposal: keep the __init__.py requirement for top-level pacakages, but drop it for subpackages.

I don't particularly like it. You still need __init__.py's for 'import *' to work (not that I like or use 'import *' :). The first question that pops into my mind when I think file-less modules is "where does the package-module come from". That question is a lot easier to answer (not to mention explain) when all packages have an __init__.py. It also adds to Python's consistency (which means people learn something from it that they can apply to other things later; in that case, removing it just hampers their growth.) And besides, it's just not that big a deal. I don't feel strongly enough about it to object, though. However, I would suggest adding a warning for existing, __init__.py-less directories that would-have-been imported in 2.5. (There's an alpha3 scheduled, so it doesn't have to go in alpha2 tonight, and it could probably be last-minuted into beta1 too.) That should fix both Google's problems and that of everyone having existing non-package subdirs :-) Then, if it really matters, we can change the import in 2.6. Note that absolute import (which will be turned on for all in 2.6) 2.7, see the PEP. -- Thomas Wouters Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!