osdir.com


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Python-Dev] PEP 594: Removing dead batteries from the standard library


On Tue, 21 May 2019 at 14:03, Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info> wrote:

> I know that saying anything against pip and virtual environments is
> heresy, but honestly, "just install it from PyPI" is not friendly to
> beginners or those who just want something that works without a load of
> extra complexity.

Speaking as a pip developer, I 100% support this comment. For a major
segment of Python's user base, if something isn't in the stdlib (or
their preferred distribution - Anaconda or a Linux distro, for
example) then it's a significant step upward in complexity.

Having said this, I'm not as sure I agree with the rest of Steven's
posting. I think that in general, this PEP is sensible and strikes a
good balance. It's all very well saying "the Python core devs aren't
willing to support these libraries any more" - but being quite that
blunt invites a backlash. The PEP demonstrates that we're doing due
dilligence over the process, and even if some people disagree with the
decisions made, the arguments have been made in public. "You can get
equivalents off PyPI" is only a very minor part of the argument here,
the main thrust being "... and in general we don't think many people
need to". It's a judgement call, and it needs review, but "rarely
used" captures the sense well enough (given that we want a short
phrase, not an explanatory paragraph...)

Regarding the title, It strikes me as fine, it's a slightly light
hearted play on the "batteries included" idea, and even if the
batteries in question aren't entirely dead, they are definitely pinin'
for the fjords. Discussions like this need a bit of levity to keep us
all grounded, IMO.

Paul