-On [20100220 13:04], "Martin v. Löwis" (martin@v.loewis.de) wrote:
The last commits by Fredrik to ElementTree in Python SVN that I can see are dated 2006-08-16. The last commits I can see to ElementTree at http://svn.effbot.python-hosting.com/ are dated 2006-07-05.
And?
[snip]
# Since you've effectively hijacked the library, and have created your # own fork that's not fully compatible with any formal release of the # upstream library, and am not contributing any patches back to # upstream, I suggest renaming it instead.
This may be politely phrased, but it seems that he is quite upset about these proposed changes.
I'd rather drop ElementTree from the standard library than fork it.
Maybe I am fully misunderstanding something here and I am also known for
just bluntly stating things but:
Isn't inclusion into the standard library under the assumption that
maintenance will be performed on the code? With all due respect to Frederik,
but if you add such a module to the base distribution and then ignore it for
3-4 years I personally have a hard time feeling your 'outrage' being
justified for someone who is trying to fix outstanding issues in
ElementTree.
I also do not find your idea of dropping the module productive either
Martin. Just dropping it for no other reason because someone cannot be
bothered to act as a responsible maintainer just seems not useful for Python
users at all. Especially since patches *are* available.
If Frederik has problems with that he should have put a bit more effort into
maintaining it in the first place.
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven