[Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

[Phillip J. Eby]

At 02:49 PM 3/16/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Phillip J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
> >  Btw, would you mind pronouncing (or at least commenting) on PEP 365,
> >  so that I can proceed with the work -- or not.
>
>Can you point me to past discussions? ISTR that this is controversial.

The original discussion thread is here...

http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2007-May/thread.html#72891

It mainly discusses why MAL's counterproposals to revamp the API, 
split into multiple modules, etc.,  did not address any of the PEP's 
goals or rationale.

And here is the second thread, which is mostly support/encouragement 
for adding setuptools to the stdlib, or at least pkg_resources:

http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-January/thread.html#76379

The thread subject is "PEP: per-user site-packages directory", but 
beginning with that message from Steve Holden, the entire thread is 
about PEP 365.

As far as I can tell, the proposal has seen much more Usenet Nod 
Syndrome than controversy.  None, actually, outside of MAL's 
objections.  Even MvL voiced support for actually expanding the 
proposal to include an 'easy_install' stub:

http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-January/076391.html

Oh, and there is one additional discussion here, sort of...

http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-January/075922.html

but despite the subject line, it wasn't really about the PEP at 
all!  The entire discussion ended up being about whether namespace 
packages should be used in the stdlib, and the consensus was "no", 
because (among other things) the real benefit of namespace packages 
is to allow an *organization* to claim a package space (e.g. zope.*), 
not to "make all the doctors in town live on the same street", as you 
put it.  :)  Here's a good summary:

http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-January/075952.html