[Email-SIG] [Python-Dev] email package status in 3.X

[Michael Foord]

On 18/06/2010 16:09, lutz at rmi.net wrote:
> Replying en masse to save bandwidth here...
>
> Barry Warsaw<barry at python.org>  writes:
>    
>> We know it, we have extensively discussed how to fix it, we have IMO a good
>> design, and we even have someone willing and able to tackle the problem.  We
>> need to find a sufficient source of funding to enable him to do the work it
>> will take, and so far that's been the biggest stumbling block.  It will take a
>> focused and determined effort to see this through, and it's obvious that
>> volunteers cannot make it happen.  I include myself in the latter category, as
>> I've tried and failed at least twice to do it in my spare time.
>>      
> All understood, and again, not to disparage anyone here.  My
> comments are directed to the development community at large
> to underscore the grave p/r problems 3.X faces.
>
> I realize email parsing is a known issue; I also realize that
> most people evaluating 3.X today won't care that it is.  Most
> will care only that the new version of a language reportedly
> used by Google and YouTube still doesn't support CGI uploads
> a year and a half after its release.  As an author, that's a
> downright horrible story to have to tell the world.
>
>    

Really? How widely used is the CGI module these days? Maybe there is a 
reason nobody appeared to notice...


> [snip...]
>> Should Python 3 have been held back until email was fixed?  Dunno, but
>> I personally am very glad it was not; where I have a choice, I always
>> use Python 3 now, and have yet to run into a problem.
>>      
> I guess we'll just have to disagree on that.  IMHO, Python 3 shot
> itself in the foot by releasing in half-baked form.  And the 3.0
> I/O speed issue (remember that?) came very close to blowing its
> leg clean off.
>
>    

Whilst I agree that there are plenty of issues to workon, and I don't 
underestimate the difficulty of some of them, I think "half-baked" is 
very much overblown. Whilst you have a lot to say about how much of a 
problem this is I don't understand what you are suggesting be *done*?

Python 3.0 was *declared* to be an experimental release, and by most 
standards 3.1 (in terms of the core language and functionality) was a 
solid release.

Any reasonable expectation about Python 3 adoption predicted that it 
would take years, and would include going through a phase of difficulty 
and disappointment...

All the best,

Michael Foord

-- 
http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/blog

READ CAREFULLY. By accepting and reading this email you agree, on behalf of your employer, to release me from all obligations and waivers arising from any and all NON-NEGOTIATED agreements, licenses, terms-of-service, shrinkwrap, clickwrap, browsewrap, confidentiality, non-disclosure, non-compete and acceptable use policies (”BOGUS AGREEMENTS”) that I have entered into with your employer, its partners, licensors, agents and assigns, in perpetuity, without prejudice to my ongoing rights and privileges. You further represent that you have the authority to release me from any BOGUS AGREEMENTS on behalf of your employer.