2009/4/6 P.J. Eby <p...@telecommunity.com>: > At 04:43 PM 4/6/2009 +0200, Lennart Regebro wrote: >> >> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 16:04, P.J. Eby <p...@telecommunity.com> wrote: >> > I don't understand why you're so anxious to deprecate something without >> > first understanding what it's for. >> >> If nobody understands it, that is in itself reason to replace it with >> something people understand. > > I mean understanding the use cases and how distutils features are used in > the field. Deprecating something that people do understand and use, simply > because you don't understand or use it, is not responsible stewardship for a > stdlib package, IMO.
This is your point of view. But not the point of view of other people. And quit saying this is a unresponsible stewardship. IMHO the way you are driving setuptools since a few month now is *way* worse than anything done in this field. Unlike you, I am here to discuss things and try to find a consensus among people. And we have made more progress in a few months than you did I think. (people are working together and are not facing a bottleneck anymore) I didn't understand in the first place why people were moving away from distutils-SIG, now I get it . So please make you points but don't attack people that are trying to move things forward this is not a correct behavior in the Python community. > > -- Tarek Ziadé | Association AfPy | www.afpy.org Blog FR | http://programmation-python.org Blog EN | http://tarekziade.wordpress.com/ _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig