[Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Exposing pkguitl's import emulation (was Re: r85538 - python/branches/py3k/Doc/library/pkgutil.rst)

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Sat Oct 23 16:28:49 CEST 2010

On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 5:11 AM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 09:26, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
>> Am 19.10.2010 17:24, schrieb P.J. Eby:
>>> Well, my intention at least was that they should be documented and
>>> released; it's the documenting part I didn't get around to.  ;-)
>>> Of course, this was also pre-importlib; were we starting the work
>>> today, the obvious thing to do would be to expose the Python
>>> implementations of the relevant objects.
>> I don't care much either way; however I don't really like when there are
>> public APIs (i.e. non-underscore-prefixed globals in a non-underscore-
>> prefixed module) that aren't documented, because it is confusing to
>> developers who don't know if they can use it or not.  (See re.scanner.)
>> The best thing is probably to let Brett (Hello Brett!) determine how
>> much of it can be replaced by importlib, and add a note to that effect
>> to the pkgutil docs.
> The pkgutil stuff that was exposed cannot be directly replaced with a
> public API in Python 3.2, but the plan is that it will be in Python
> 3.3 when *all* concrete implementations of importers are exposed
> (because I will be attempting to bootstrap importlib). So if people
> are willing to wait and take me at my word that this will happen in
> Python 3.3, then this can come back out. But obviously I cannot make
> promises as Real Life will *actually* be starting for me when the
> Python 3.3 development cycle begins.

Given the water under this bridge (and the fact PJE actually did
intend for these to be public interfaces), I'm happy enough with the
idea of having these pkgutil features documented properly.


Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list