On 2010-03-01 11:34 , Patrick Maupin wrote:
On Mar 1, 11:13 am, Robert Kern<robert.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
Ignore it. That comment really doesn't apply to this case. That's for things
that only make sense in the language or standard library, like context managers.
For libraries like this, Steven's summary is correct. It needs to have a useful
life as a third party package for a few years before you should propose it for
inclusion into the standard library. By all means, distribute a design document
for comment before you implement things; it's a reasonable practice. But don't
bother with a PEP yet.
So, I went and re-read PEP 1, and in the fine print it directs me to
PEP 2. Mea culpa -- I though I understood the PEP.
Nonetheless, the fact that I created what I call a "PEP draft" seems
to have had more read into it than I meant. I will bear this in mind
when I start future projects. I have a couple of projects, and
contribute to another, which in no way should wind up in the standard
library. But I find the lack of a good, up-to-date, configuration
reader in the library to be an issue, which is why I had the temerity
to try to start a discussion on what a good standard configuration
file reader should be.
Yes, I would like to create something compelling enough to go into the
standard library. No, I don't expect it to wind up there for a very
long time, if ever. BUT, at the same time, following the PEP format
is very valuable for my project. It forces me to think more deeply
about the problem I am solving and it forces me to write down some
documentation. Really, it's no more burdensome than any other similar
useful template.
Certainly. The PEP format is a useful one. I've used it myself for some numpy
design documents. But can you see why people might get confused about your
intentions when you call it a draft PEP and post it to python-dev? If you stop
calling it a PEP and stop talking about putting it in the standard library,
people will stop being distracted by those issues.
--
Robert Kern
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
