On Mon, 8 Aug 2005 00:51:04 -0800, "EP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Which is exactly why I said at the beginning that people shouldn't = > >> bother with this thread and should instead just get to work. >> = > > > >Robert, you are probably right, but I think how we get to work is important= > as well. > >What I posted was a little intellectually thin, but it would be nice to sti= >r the collective energy toward some common (and useful) objectives. I thin= >k that something more than a superior language specification is required fo= >r a language to get a firm foothold in the IT world (and that is something = >I would personally like for Python.) > >It seems there are people very capable and willing to develop the good appl= >ications/tools/frameworks on top of Python, but too many of those projects = >do not gain critical mass; rather we have dozens of competing applications = >and frameworks that never blossom to their full potential. I'd love to see= > a little consensus on what "goodies" should be developed atop the language= >; what standards, principles, and API/hooks those goodies should provide; a= >nd then a collaborative effort to get there. Projects with a broader buy-i= >n have a greater chance of achieving their potential. It occurs to me that we have the PEP process for core python, but no PEP process for the python app/lib environment. What about starting a PEEP process (Python Environment Enhancement Proposals) modeled on PEPs, where those motivated to formalize their pet projects or feature requests could collaborate to create a spec to document and guide development? > >It does seem that perhaps some ground was gained with the WSGI effort. I u= >nderstand Django [http://www.djangoproject.com/], a RoR alternative based o= >n the WSGI spec, already has some buzz though "the cat got out of the bag a= > bit early" and Django is "not officially launched just yet." > >It makes sense to ask one's fellow developers and Python users what a new o= >pen source development should look and act like if one wants to develop som= >ething great. Open source code denotes sharing, but we should add teamwork= > and community involvement in the code as connotations if we want our open = >source to reach its potential. > PEEP as a vehicle? > >What are the top 5 developments, aside from specification and implementatio= >n details of the language itself, which Python still needs for greater succ= >ess in the day to day IT world? > > > > >EriPy pyDerson > > > > > >P.S. In terms of a more concrete suggestion, I propose the Python communit= >y form an intervention team who are ready to fly in and intercede any time = >a developer, whose brilliance has been expended in their heroic coding effo= >rt, goes to name their new module, package, or application with a "py" othe= >r than to the right of the dot. > Probably better to have the PSF hire a patent/trademark lawyer to reserve rights to py... names and the "py"-prefixing business process ;-/ Regards, Bengt Richter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
