[Python-ideas] Moving development out of the standard library
solipsis at pitrou.net
Mon Jun 7 21:56:22 CEST 2010
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 14:20:41 -0500
Ian Bicking <ianb at colorstudy.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis-xNDA5Wrcr86sTnJN9+BGXg at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > > I say there is consensus because as far as I know anything substantial
> > has a
> > > maintained version outside the standard library; argparse is implicitly,
> > > unittest is unittest2, ElementTree always has maintained a separate
> > > existence, simplejson implicitly.
> > "Anything substantial" is more than exagerated. The modules you are
> > mentioning are exceptions, two of which may even be temporary (argparse
> > and unittest2). Most sdtlib modules don't have external releases, and
> > many of them are still "substantial".
> Most other modules are very old.
Well, even if that's true (I haven't checked and I guess we wouldn't
agree on the meaning of "old"), so what?
I guess what I'm asking is: what is your line of reasoning?
You started with a contention that:
“There is no reason any new library or functionality should be tied to a
and, in my humble opinion, you failed to demonstrate that. In
particular, you haven't replied to my argument that it
dramatically eases dependency management.
> distutils2 won't be in 2.7 at least, and any packaging system not available
> for Python 2 would be irrelevant.
That's your opinion and I guess some people would disagree. Besides,
decreeing that distutils2 be kept out of the stdlib won't make it
its code magically compatible with Python 2.x.
More information about the Python-ideas