PIGgies?

John Landahl jpl at digex.net.nospamplease
Thu Aug 19 02:15:23 CEST 1999


I'm a recent convert to Python and would love to see its credibility
heightened and its use in the mainstream increased.  Python seems to have
what it takes to become *the* general purpose programming language.  It's
certainly more suited for the job than some of the other current favorites.

Lately I've been considering forming a high profile user group in San
Francisco to help promote Python as a serious tool for mainstream use.  Much
to my chagrin I discovered that there's already a (recent) group called
"BayPIGgies".  I later noticed that the term "PIGgies" is used elsewhere for
Python user groups.  Am I the only Python enthusiast that has a problem with
the term "PIGgies"?

I certainly don't want to offend those who have chosen the term.  Rather, I
strongly believe that the Python community must remain united and close-knit
if the language is to gain wide-spread acceptance in the industry.  I think
that acceptance would be found more readily with advocacy groups bearing
slightly more serious names.  Of course, the "IG" in "PIGgies" stands for
Interest Group, so these groups are not necessarily meant to be public
advocates.  Even still, I think the term can still be a turn-off for those
thinking about getting involved with the language and the Python community.

These are my opinions, of course, and I graciously solicit the opinions of
others.  What do you think of the term "PIGgies"?  Do you feel that there is
a need (and room) for separate interest and advocacy groups?  Do either the
Python Software Activity or the Python Consortium already fill the advocacy
role?

John Landahl
jpl at digex.net




More information about the Python-list mailing list