On 2008-02-24 23:39, Fred Drake wrote:
On Feb 24, 2008, at 4:58 PM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
I think that essential things like the email package should be part of the standard library.
Non-essential things like e.g. the tk package or the audio/image/etc. libs can well be separated out into stand-alone packages.
What's essential is a judgement call. You & I would draw the line in different places.
Right, and that's what causes endless discussions.
Things that are tightly coupled with the Python runtime do seem to belong in the standard library. A feature that I hear requests for frequently that would be tightly coupled would be deferred imports.
Then we have a different idea of scope of the std lib. We'd have to remove the tk package, the html package, the dbm package, etc. if we were to follow your idea of what the std lib should be and only very few modules would be left in such a std lib.
Other languages split such modules into a "core" or "lang" package. Perhaps that's what you're after ?
They may still be supported and maintained by the PSF, but getting them would require an extra install step.
I think supported & maintained by the PSF is fine; I'm not in favor of throwing out useful packages.
In any case, I agree that putting energy into such an effort is better spent elsewhere.
Interestingly, I didn't see either myself or Brett say anything like this. I only said I don't have the time to champion such an idea, not that I had anything else to do (there's work, there's family, and then... I'm wiped out).
That's essentially what I meant.