[Python-Dev] PEP 3148 ready for pronouncement

[Steven D'Aprano]

On Wed, 26 May 2010 07:39:15 pm Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Wed, 26 May 2010 04:25:18 -0400
>
> Glyph Lefkowitz <glyph at twistedmatrix.com> wrote:
> > In other words, while I kinda-sorta buy Brian's argument that
> > having this module in easy reach will motivate more people to use a
> > standard, tested idiom for parallelization, I *don't* think that
> > the stdlib should be expanded simply to accommodate those who just
> > don't want to install additional packages for anything.
>
> +1.  Why don't the castrated-by-the-corporation people offer to
> maintain a "Sumo" distribution of Python on python.org instead?  The
> rest of the world shouldn't have to be impacted by their corporate
> culture woes.


It's not just the corporate culture. For many people, the standard 
library is the first introduction to even the existence of a particular 
technique or technology. You can't go looking for something on PyPI if 
you don't know that there's a something to look for. And for many 
beginners and not-so-beginners, the idea and practice of installing 
additional packages is simply problematic.

I'm not saying that Python-Dev should bend over backwards to accommodate 
such people to the exclusion of all else, but these folks are 
stakeholders too, and their wants and needs are just as worthy as the 
wants and needs of those who prefer a more conservative approach to the 
standard library.

This is a Python implementation of a stable Java API, Brian has said the 
futures package has been on PyPI for about a year, and it's been 
flagged as a production/stable release since October last year.

http://pypi.python.org/pypi/futures3

Given that there does seem to be a general agreement that futures should 
go into the std lib at some point, is this not sufficient exposure?


-- 
Steven D'Aprano