[pydotorg-www] Editing permissions for IntegratedDevelopmentEnvironments for AndrewJanke

[Steve Holden]

Your call, but as an active Wing user I will just point out that the
company support their product very actively, if that helps.

regards
 Steve

Steve Holden

On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 3:18 AM, Andrew Janke <andrew at apjanke.net> wrote:

>
> On 5/27/18 10:25 AM, Mats Wichmann wrote:
>
>> On 05/26/2018 12:22 PM, Andrew Janke wrote:
>>
>>> Good to go. I was able to edit the page. Thanks!
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>> Thanks for taking this on... someone motivated to pick a an IDE is the
>> perfect candidate to update the tables.  You even inspired me to make a
>> few more changes!
>>
>> While we're here, there are links to a number of articles that compare
>> IDEs.  In this modern world, there appear to be an infinite number of
>> "ten best" type articles, as, sadly, people have learned how effective
>> they are as clickbait, so I'm not sure how to refresh this list, but I'm
>> thinking that we should drop the older articles. The ones from 2000,
>> 2005, even 2008 seem unlikely to be very applicable, as all of the
>> surviving IDEs have evolved, and some (BlackAdder?) don't seem to have
>> survived.  Any objections if I kill a few?  Andrew - if you found any
>> useful comparsion article, please feel free to add, I'm just thinking we
>> shouldn't add the dozens, maybe hundreds, of such comparisons that pop
>> up if you ask a search engine.
>>
>> -- mats
>>
>> That makes sense.
>
> I have no useful comparison articles to add. I think one can smell the
> difference between original content and a "ten best" clickbait listicle,
> and all the decent original-content comparison articles I've found are
> already in this Wiki entry. (E.g. this one that you have linked is a really
> good one: https://xcorr.net/2013/04/17/evaluating-ides-for-scientific-
> python/) Which is kind of sad because the last comparo article is from
> 2013.
>
> At any rate, I also agree with not adding all the content-farm junk that
> one finds in Google.
>
> IMHO, as far as old links on this article go, I'd say remove the link
> that's for WingIDE specifically, but actually keep all the rest, even the
> ones as old as 2000: those are good, content-deep articles, are of
> historical interest, serve as examples of how to compare IDEs, and given
> how slowly the Python IDE ecosystem seems to be evolving, are still
> relevant. I found them all useful in my current efforts to learn about
> Python IDEs. And some of these articles don't surface in a Google search
> for "Python IDEs"; they're buried in "ten best" clickbait, so I think it's
> still useful to have them collected in a list.
>
> Cheers,
> Andrew
>
> _______________________________________________
> pydotorg-www mailing list
> pydotorg-www at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pydotorg-www
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/pydotorg-www/attachments/20180605/0c3985c2/attachment.html>