On 8/25/07, Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Aug 25, 2007, at 9:36 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > FYI, I'm removing the email package from the py3k branch for now. > > If/when Barry has a working version we'll add it back. Given that it's > > so close to the release I'd rather release without the email package > > than with a broken one. If Barry finishes it after the a1 release, > > people who need it can always download his version directly. > > Alternately, we could move toward separate libraries for such > components; this allows separate packages to have separate > maintenance cycles, and makes it easier for applications to pick up > bug fixes.
Are you suggesting of just leaving email out of the core then and just have people download it as necessary? Or just having it developed externally and thus have its own release schedule, but then pull in the latest stable release when we do a new Python release? I don't like the former, but the latter is intriguing. If we could host large packages (e.g., email, sqlite, ctypes, etc.) on python.org by providing tracker, svn, and web space they could be developed and released on their own schedule. Then the Python release would then become a sumo release of these various packages. People could release code that still depends on a specific Python version flatly (and thus not have external dependencies), or say it needs support of Python 2.6 + email 42.2 or something if some feature is really needed). But obviously this ups the resource needs on Python's infrastructure so I don't know how reasonable it really is in the end. -Brett _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
