On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 at 20:37, Steve Dower <steve.do...@python.org> wrote:
> Please let us know > *publicly* if you want to become the maintainer for a stdlib module and > then we can support them, but if nobody is willing/able/ready to care > for them it's irresponsible for us to keep shipping them to users. I'm sorry for picking on a single point you made and continuing to simply state my contrary view, but I think it's important. IMO, it's irresponsible of us to *remove* functionality if there's no suitable alternative (and remember, my definition of "suitable" includes "appropriate for cases where a PyPI library isn't acceptable for some reason"). Of course, it's not OK for us to promise a level of support that we can't or won't provide, but *we don't provide such promises*. We say that we support the stdlib, but there's no actual statement of what that means - so it's not clear to me how we're failing to deliver "enough". Nor is it at all clear to me that dumping the responsibility on an external maintainer will be any better - most likely it just lets *us* feel better about the situation while not actually being better for the end user. If we were to define some sort of actual support guarantees, we might be having a different conversation. But I'm unclear how a volunteer organisation can provide meaningful promises that we wouldn't be able to deliver for the stdlib as it stands now. Paul _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/OSYFNLIULB56EVSG57QXKIW4NRWI4CNZ/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
