On Tue, 21 May 2019 at 14:03, Steven D'Aprano <st...@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 _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
