[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, May 21, 2019 at 01:59:56PM -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 5/21/2019 9:01 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> ...
> >Many Python users don't have the privilege of being able to install
> >arbitrary, unvetted packages from PyPI. They get to use only packages
> >from approved vendors, including the stdlib, what they write themselves,
> >and nothing else. Please don't dismiss this part of the Python community
> >just because they don't typically hang around in the same forums we do.
> ...
> The problem with this argument, taken by itself, it that it would argue 
> for adding to the stdlib 100s or 1000s of modules or packages that would 
> be useful to many more people than the modules proposed to be dropped. 

No -- taken *by itself* it is only an argument against removing what 
already exists (or at least to be conservative in what we remove). That 
is all I'm saying.

It requires an *additional* argument that we add anything new, and I'm 
not making that argument here.

The additional argument is valid as a counter to "just put it on PyPI". 
The argument goes like this:

- if we agree that the aardvark module is useful and appropriate for 
  the std lib (not every useful module is, for many reasons!) we could 
  still decide not to add it;

- if we add it to the std lib, it will be available to 100% of users
  of the std lib;

- but if we say "put it on PyPI", it will only be available to (let's
  say) 85% of users.

But I'm not making that argument here because I'm not asking to add