On 20/02/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 19, 5:31 pm, "Diez B. Roggisch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > May I insist? By the criteria you've mentioned so far, nothing rules > > > out 'ext'. If it's still a bad idea, there's a reason. What is it? > > > > You imply that just because something is somehow working and even useful > > for a *some* people (some being maybe only you) that it would be worth > > including in the python standard lib. It is not. > > > > There are no really formal rules for inclusion, but these are certainly > > rules of thumb that are being considered: > > > > - is it useful for *a lot of people* > > > > - will it be mantained and maintainable for "ever" once it is part of > > the standard distribution > > > > - does it introduce external dependencies? If yes, this must be *very* > > carful considered. > > > > - is the design well-thought and mature > > > > - does it make sense tying the release cycle of python the cycle of the > > new lib > > > > And insulting the people who do work on python and do a marvellous job > > doing so is certainly *not* helping. > > > > Diez > > > I don't know quite how to handle your reply. Counterexamples are > already in. Shall I add this to the list: > > - is someone's favorite?
No, that is not reason to include something in the standard libraries. > You all know the allegory of the Apes and the Fire Hose. But 'ext' is > actually good. No, I don't. Does anybody else? > Do you have these: > > - It would not get used by anyone > - It is not useful to very many people > - There is some concern it could not remain maintainable > - It is neither well-thought out nor mature > - It will not ever make sense to tie it in to the Python cycle > > ? > > If not, how about these: > > - It doesn't match the rest of the language > - It's too cutting edge > - It is too hard to handle > - It would get out of hand really quickly > - I can't control you anymore after I let it in > - The functionality already exists per se > - It is to the rest of the language as wires #3, #4, and #5 are to RCA > cables What? Here, again, you talk of things that noone here necessarily understands. > - HTML 4.01 is not an improvement over HTML 4.0 How is that relevant? > ? > > If still not, how about these: > > - It hurts my feelings > - It foils my revenge > - I'd rather you toil meanially > - Tedious is good > - You shouldn't have power > - But I'm greedy > - We can't afford it That's trolling. You are about a picometer from my killfile. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
