On 20/03/2008, at 12:45, Guilherme Polo wrote:
I'm considering the inclusion of rpyc, with appropriate changes (possibly lots). And would like to know your opinions towards this.
I think the route you would have to go is making a pep, and one of the things I would like to see in this pep would be why rpyc and not any of the other rpc modules around (like the not recomended for general use zrpc or pyro or the thing the guys from twisted have). Only if your pep is accept I think you should waste your time making it better for the stdlib.
The two "think" in my last paragraph are there because I am not sure this the right route, this is just a guess.
-- Leonardo Santagada