[Python-Dev] Dropping __init__.py requirement for subpackages

[Guido van Rossum]

On 4/26/06, Thomas Wouters <thomas at python.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 4/26/06, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> > OK, forget it. I'll face the pitchforks.
>
>
> Maybe this'll help:
>
> http://python.org/sf/1477281
>
> (You can call it 'oldtimer-repellant' if you want to use it to convince
> people there isn't any *real* backward-compatibility issue.)

I'd worry that it'll cause complaints when the warning is incorrect
and a certain directory is being skipped intentionally. E.g. the
"string" directory that someone had. Getting a warning like this can
be just as upsetting to newbies!

> > I'm disappointed though -- it sounds like we can never change anything
> > about Python any more because it will upset the oldtimers.
>
> That's a bit unfair, Guido. There are valid reasons not to change Python's
> behaviour in this respect, regardless of upset old-timers.

Where are the valid reasons? All I see is knee-jerk -1, -1, -1, and
"this might cause tools to do the wrong thing". Not a single person
attempted to see it from the newbie POV; several people explicitly
rejected the newbie POV as invalid. I still don't know the name of any
tool that would break due to this *and where the breakage wouldn't be
easy to fix by adjusting the tool's behavior*. Yes, fixing tools is a
pain. But they have to be fixed for every new Python version anyway --
new keywords, new syntax, new bytecodes, etc.

> Besides, you're
> the BDFL; if you think the old-timers are wrong, I implore you to put their
> worries aside (after dutiful contemplation.)

I can only do that so many times before I'm no longer the BDFL. It's
one thing to break a tie when there is widespread disagreement amongst
developers (like about the perfect decorator syntax). It's another to
go against a see of -1's.

> I've long since decided that
> any change what so ever will have activist luddites opposing it. I think
> most of them would stop when you make a clear decision -- how much whining
> have you had about the if-else syntax since you made the choice? I've heard
> lots of people gripe about it in private (at PyCon, of course, I never see
> Pythonistas anywhere else :-P), but I haven't seen any python-dev rants
> about it. I certainly hate PEP-308's guts, but if if-else is your decision,
> if-else is what we'll do. And so it is, I believe, with this case.

OK. Then I implore you, please check in that patch (after adding error
checking for PyErr_Warn() -- and of course after a2 hs been shipped),
and damn the torpedoes.

--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)