A Policy for Inclusion in the Standard Library: was Modules forinclusion in standard library?
tjreedy at udel.edu
Sun Jul 3 22:03:59 CEST 2005
"Colin J. Williams" <cjw at sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:IvUxe.1417$Ud.58683 at news20.bellglobal.com...
> Terry Reedy wrote:
>> A couple of times, Guido has given his general policy as generally
>> best-of-breed, tested and accepted by the community; and backed by a
>> developer who will adapt it and its doc up to stdlib standards (if
>> necessary) and commit to maintainence for a few years.
> This is a good base. Presumably "accepted by the community" means
> with some minimum number of ongoing users.
Yes. Users also indicate practical (versus theoretical) usefullness and
also test beyond what a developer might (especially documentation).
Of course, modules written by the inner core group of active developers or
on their behalf may bypass these criteria, but the context of my answer was
discussion of inclusion of existing modules mostly or all written by other
Part of the maintainence requirement is a willingness to work compatibly
with the Python release cycle. Related to that is something I left out on
the other side: willingness to license the module to the PSF for inclusion.
Some people seem to assume that everyone 'of course' wants their stuff
included and that it is just Guido blocking inclusion, but that just is not
Terry J. Reedy
More information about the Python-list