[Python-ideas] stdlib upgrades

Tarek Ziadé ziade.tarek at gmail.com
Tue Jun 1 23:53:20 CEST 2010

On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Ian Bicking <ianb at colorstudy.com> wrote:
> 4. The standard library is one big chunk of functionality, upgraded all
> under one version number, and specifically works together (though in
> practice cross-module refactorings are uncommon).
> There's positive things about these features, but 4 really drives me nuts,
> and I think is a strong disincentive to putting stuff into the standard
> library.  For packaging I think 4 actively damages maintainability.
> Packaging is at the intersection of several systems:
> * Python versions
> * Forward and backward compatibility with distributed libraries
> * System policies (e.g., Debian has changed things around a lot in the last
> few years)
> * A whole other ecosystem of libraries outside of Python (e.g., binding to C
> libraries)
> * Various developer toolkits, some Python specific (e.g., Cython) some not
> (gcc)
> I don't think it's practical to think that we can determine some scope of
> packaging where it will be stable in the long term, all these things are
> changing and many are changing without any particular concern for how it
> affects Python (i.e., packaging must be reactive).  And frankly we clearly
> do not have packaging figured out, we're still circling in on something...
> and I think the circling will be more like a Strange Attractor than a sink
> drain.

Are you suggesting to have a third layer ?

* Python
* stdlib
* stdlib-extras (distutils2, pip, etc)

is that what some people called a "sumo" release of Python ?

Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org

More information about the Python-ideas mailing list