John Szakmeister wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Armin Ronacher <armin.ronacher@active-4.com> wrote:
Hi everybody,
I'm known for my dislike of the standard libray. In the past I wrote some blog posts about this topic into my personal blog already. However as many people pointed out earlier, a blog is not the place for this kind of criticism. Not only that, also just ranting about a topic does not help at all. Yesterday I subscribed to the stdlib-sig and immediately tons of mails ended up in my inbox. A quick look at the mail archives confirms what I was afraid of: this list is really high traffic. I tried to read up some of the discussions I missed but it's nearly impossible to do that.
I think that's out of the norm... the list has been quiet until recently. :-)
[snip]
Any maybe we should have some elected task forces for things like the standard library. Judging from the mailinglist it appears that far too many people are discussing *every detail* of it. It is a good idea to ask as many people as possible, but I am not sure if the mailinglist is the way to do that. It is currently very hard to see the direction in which development is heading.
Please think of this email just as a suggestion. I don't have too much trust into myself to follow the discussions on this list camely enough to become a real part of a solution, but I would love to help shifting the development into a better direction, no matter which one it will be.
Just a thought: PyCon 2010 is around the corner. Open space? Something more formalized? Is that too late (because we will have lost momentum)?
It looks like it will be something covered at the language summit, but an open space is a good idea. Backwards compatibility is a *big* problem for any major refactoring though. Michael
-John _______________________________________________ stdlib-sig mailing list stdlib-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/stdlib-sig