Andrew Stuart writes: > So do you think it might make sense to just expand the range of > “working example archivers” i.e. like the “prototype” archiver > currently does, instead of trying to provide something that would > be a maintenance burden?
Yes, that sounds like an excellent plan to me. If it becomes obvious during design that there are substantial commonalities across a number of concrete archivers, then the design can be refactored to generalize at that stage. Otherwise, let's just build them, see if people use them and if commonalities appear later the refactoring could be a GSoC project. > That way people can see the archivers, can use them if they want > but they’re just examples that can be used as a starting point, not > designed to meet all needs. Exactly! _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
