[Python-Dev] PEP 382 specification and implementation complete

"Martin v. Löwis" martin at v.loewis.de
Sun Nov 6 21:51:49 CET 2011

> I think this was based on the assumption that *existing* namespace
> package approaches would break under the new scheme. Since that is not
> the case, I suspect those previous objections were overstated (and all
> packaging related code manages to cope well enough with modules where
> the file name doesn't match the package name)

I just drafted a message rebutting Phillip's objection, when I then
found that you disagree as well :-)

One elaboration:

>   The downsides, however, are also plentiful.  If a package starts
>   its life as a normal package, it must be renamed when it becomes
>   a namespace, with the implied consequences for revision control
>   tools.

If a package starts out as a regular (P/__init__.py) package
(possibly with __init__.py being empty), then making it a namespace
package actually requires no change at all - that single __init__.py
could continue to exist.

Developers may decide to still delete __init__.py and rename the
package to .pyp (with VCS consequences), but that would be their
choice deciding whether purity beats practicality in their case
(where I think most developers actually would rename the directory
once they can drop support for pre-3.3 releases).


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list