On Fri, Dec 06, 2002, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Aahz:
Having just slogged my way through the entire import thread so far, I've got to ask why nobody else has demanded a PEP before we go any further? There are too many competing proposals; we need a good summary of what design we're planning, plus a summary of why all other proposals are rejected.
I'm a very strong -1 on anything until there's a PEP.
Well, there's PEP 273 which only discusses a feature (import from zip files) and an API (strings in sys.path that reference zip files). The PEP stands (I pronounce it accepted if it helps).
But I agree that any API changes beyond that (either in C or in Python) need more consideration, and a PEP would be fine.
Yeah, I should have been clearer that I meant "any changes beyond what's in PEP 273"; I did read PEP 273 before posting to see whether there was coverage of the thread. I think this really needs a new PEP rather than updating PEP 273, because (as you say) PEP 273 covers its domain clearly. -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "To me vi is Zen. To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is a koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated. You discover truth everytime you use it." --reddy@lion.austin.ibm.com