[Python-Dev] [RELEASED] Python 2.7 alpha 2

David Lyon david.lyon at preisshare.net
Tue Jan 12 00:22:42 CET 2010

Hi Martin,

> Of course, the less active fraction of Python contributors may not
> notice, since they just chose to not contribute (which, of course,
> is fine). However, asking me to work twice as much as I want to
> on the project to keep two branches alive is just unfair.

Totally true. Actually as an end-developer I'd say that python
2.x series from a programming perspective is quite good. It
doesn't need the addition of a lot of new features imho.

So for me, I think too much time spent there would be not
yield great benefits.

> This has nothing to do with pushing 3.x, but all with managing
> available manpower and still providing quality software.

Well, we all know your work is super quality. :-) That's not
being contested.

However, Quality can be measured different ways and it can
be assessed in different ways. Quality itself is a subjective

The point I'm only making is that if a piece of software
doesn't have "new" things added over time, then users
can get a reverse impression of a lack of quality.

We've all seen where 'internal' quality can increase
and user perceptions can decrease.

It could be things like improved graphics and things readily
apparent to the user.

At the moment, I would say that the "internal" quality
of the python 2.x series is super high. "external" quality
issues such as the packaging dilemma give the user the
opposite quality experience. But people are working on
that as best they can elsewhere. I'll leave it at that.

> This has nothing to do with pushing 3.x, but all with managing
> available manpower and still providing quality software.

Python 3.x needs more carrots.

>From an ordinary (perphaps ignorant) user perspective there
is nothing. Yes, we know if we actually will start
programming then we will like it more.

But my wishes to Santa Claus would be allow the free
flow of PEPs for Python 3 packaging. Even encourage

As an end developer, here's what I'd like from Santa
in 2010 to get me to swap to python 3:

 * get all the packages on pypi tested for python 3

 * put a web based package manager in python 3. This
   would perhaps be based around PIP (keep many
   people happy) and would look much like the built
   in web-console that you get with a $200 router.

 * Incorporate SCM based end-user software installs
   by adding to python3-stdlib the SCM support
   packages (cvs,bzr,svn,hg). This would *really*
   help in the scientific community.

 * put a web interface on distutils also so that
   we don't have to use a command line interface.
   (I want a pic of a smiley girl to great me
    when I build something - "Are you ready
    to build now Honey?"). ok - I joke. But the
    point is made.

So, ok, maybe these things aren't about 'code'
quality. But rather user experience.

Things like these do count also as "quality"
via the technical term "perception of quality".

If the PEP process is as unblocked as the
documentation implies, implying that anybody
can contribute to Python 3. Then there shouldn't
be any issue.


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list