[Python-Dev] PEP 423 : naming conventions and recipes related to packaging

[Markus Unterwaditzer]

In your first plone example you first use plone.app.content, but then present the directory structure of plone.app.command.

Apart from that, the PEP seems legit to me, contentwise. I think some parts are clumsily formulated, but IMO rewriting these parts wouldn't even decrease the text's length or improve readability.

-- Markus (from phone)

"Benoît Bryon" <benoit at marmelune.net> wrote:
>Hi!
>
>Attached is a an updated proposal for PEP 423.
>You can also find it online at
>https://gist.github.com/benoitbryon/2815051
>
>I am attending at EuroPython 2013 in Florence. Isn't it a great 
>opportunity to get feedback and discuss about a PEP? I registered an 
>open-space session and a lightning-talk today!
>
>Some notes about the update...
>
>The main point that was discussed in the previous proposal was the 
>"top-level namespace relates to code ownership rule". Here is a quote 
>from Antoine Pitrou:
>
>Le 27/06/2012 12:50, Antoine Pitrou a écrit :
>> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 11:08:45 +0200
>> Benoît Bryon<benoit at marmelune.net>  wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Here is an informational PEP proposal:
>>> http://hg.python.org/peps/file/52767ab7e140/pep-0423.txt
>>>
>>> Could you review it for style, consistency and content?
>> There is one Zen principle this PEP is missing:
>>
>> Flat is better than nested.
>>
>> This PEP seems to promote the practice of having a top-level
>namespace
>> denote ownership. I think it should do the reverse: promote
>> meaningful top-level packages (e.g. "sphinx") as standard practice,
>and
>> allow an exception for when a piece of software is part of a larger
>> organizational body.
>
>So, the main change in the proposal I'm sending today is the removal of
>
>this "ownership" rule.
>It has been replaced by "Use a single namespace (except special
>cases)".
>
>Some additional changes have been performed, such as removal of some 
>sections about "opportunity" or "promote migrations". I also added a 
>"Rationale" section where I pointed out some issues related to naming.
>
>The PEP has been marked as "deferred" because it was inactive and it is
>
>partly related to PEP 426. I left this deferred state.
>
>I am aware that some links in the PEP are broken... I will fix them 
>later. My very first motivation is to get feedback about the "big" 
>changes in the PEP. I wanted the update to be sent before 
>EuroPython-2013's open-space session. I guess a detailed review would
>be 
>nice anyway, for links, style, grammar...
>
>Also, I wonder whether the PEP could be shortened or not. Sometimes I 
>cannot find straightforward words to explain things, so perhaps someone
>
>with better skills in english language could help. Or maybe some parts,
>
>such as the "How to rename a project" section, could be moved in other 
>documents.
>
>Regards,
>
>Benoît
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Python-Dev mailing list
>Python-Dev at python.org
>http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>Unsubscribe:
>http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/markus%40unterwaditzer.net