Re: Proposal: No more standard library additions

Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> I hope Python won't copy CPAN literally. Every time I used it, it was
> a big pain, and I happily stopped using it when everything I needed
> came as a Debian package.

Note my emphasis on `culturally` in the previous mail. CPAN's largest
value isn't as a package management system, but as an actual canonical
repository of useful Perl code, large and small.

So my three propositions here are:

1) Having a large, canonical repository of useful Python code that's
much more encompassing than Cheeseshop would be a good thing for Python.

2) It appears the way to create and maintain such a repository is to
ingrain it into the language culture, whereby it becomes unusual that
useful redistributable code /isn't/ in the repository.

3) To address 1) and 2), we need a canonical package layout and
build/install/test cycle that are easy for developers to work with,
well-documented, and for which there exist better and less arcane tools
than what we have now.

-- 
Ivan Krstić <krstic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> | GPG: 0x147C722D
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@xxxxxxxxxx
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/gcpd3-python-3000%40m.gmane.org