On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Peter Moody <peter@hda3.com> wrote:

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Jake McGuire <mcguire@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Peter Moody <peter@hda3.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Jake McGuire <mcguire@google.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> What's the opinion of the other interested party or parties? I don't
>> >> want a repeat of the events last time, where we had to pull it at the
>> >> last time because there hadn't been enough discussion.
>> >
>> > How many other people are using this library?  I think it's hard to give
>> > really useful feedback on an API without using it for some non-trivial
>> > task,
>> > but maybe other people don't have this problem.
>> > -jake
>>
>> 188 (check that, 190) people have downloaded the 2.0 release in the
>> last week (numbers publicly available from the code.google.com). I
>> can't tell you how many (if any) have downloaded it via svn.
>
> Downloading and using are not the same thing.

Correct, but there is a strong positive correlation between the two.
If you have a better method for determining what you would consider an
appropriate level of usage, I'm all ears.

Put something on the project page (or download page if possible) saying "ipaddr is being considered for inclusion in the Python standard library.  We want to make sure it meets your needs, but we need you to tell us.  If you use ipaddr and like it, please let us know on ip-addr-dev."

I dunno, maybe it's too much work.  But no one else seems to have an opinion strong enough to share, at least not at this point.