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

[Donald Stufft]

On Tuesday, March 13, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 13 March 2012 03:48, C. Titus Brown <ctb at msu.edu (mailto:ctb at msu.edu)> wrote:
> > I feel like there's a middle ground where stable, long-term go-to modules could
> > be mentioned, though.  I don't spend a lot of time browsing PyPI, but I suspect
> > almost everyone spends a certain amount of time in the Python docs (which is a
> > testimony to their quality IMO).  So I'm in favor of conservative link-outs
> > but without any deprecating language.
> > 
> 
> 
> I applaud the idea of promoting the many excellent packages available.
> It can be very hard to separate the good from the indifferent (or even
> bad) when browsing PyPI. I've found some very good packages recently
> which I'd never have known about without some random comment on a
> mailing list.
> 
> However, I'm not keen on having the stdlib documentation suggest that
> I should be using something else. No code should ever be documenting
> "don't use me, there are better alternatives" unless it is deprecated
> or obsolete.
> 
> On the other hand, I would love to see a community-maintained document
> that described packages that are acknowledged as "best of breed". That
> applies whether or not those packages replace something in the stdlib.
> Things like pywin32, lxml, and requests would be examples in my
> experience. There's no reason this *has* to be in the core
> documentation - it may be relevant that nothing has sprung up
> independently yet...
> 
> 

http://python-guide.org ?
> 
> Maybe a separate item in the Python documentation, "External Modules",
> could be created and maintained by the community? By being in the
> documentation, it has a level of "official recommendation" status, and
> by being a top-level document it's visible (more so than, for example,
> a HOWTO document would be). Because it's in the released
> documentation, it is relatively stable, which implies that external
> modules would need to have a genuine track record to get in there, but
> because it's community maintained it should reflect a wider consensus
> than just the core developers' views.
> 
> Paul.
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org (mailto:Python-Dev at python.org)
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/donald.stufft%40gmail.com
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20120313/6bc1ac90/attachment.html>