[Python-Dev] Docs of weak stdlib modules should encourage exploration of 3rd-party alternatives

[Andrey Petrov]

Dear authors of Python's standard library: Please accept my deepest
apologies. We didn't mean for the messaging to come off as
unappreciative for you work, and I am very sorry for that!

Without the aforementioned urllib/httplib/etc I would have never made
it as far as to build my own libraries which have suited my needs
better than the foundations that originally allowed me to get off the
ground. I am very grateful for all of those responsible for building
the Python standard library and I appreciate your continued efforts.

Some specific replies:

@Senthil: I originally asked Guido for guidance on improving the
standard library and perhaps including some of my favourite projects,
but he pointed out that in a couple of years we might end up again in
the same position as before but with one extra library people will
complain about for being obsoleted yet remains impossible to
deprecate.

I agreed with Guido that embracing and even encouraging users to use the
rapidly-evolving community-built packages alongside the tried-and-true
standard library is the best move here.

@Terry: I don't know who 'darkprokoba' is. Unfortunately 'Andrey
Petrov' is a very common name. I go under the handle 'shazow' but I
haven't participated in core Python discussions until today.

I did not suggest for Python to endorse a specific module, even if it
is my own. In fact, I generally oppose doing this as I feel that when
Django was announced as the blessed 'winner' of the Python MVC
frameworks was a harmful event to all other competing frameworks at
the time.

My suggestion is to inform the users when there are other potentially
better suited alternatives available from the community PyPI and to
educate them how to find these alternatives.

- Andrey