On 11/2/06, Mike Orr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Given the widely-diverging views on what, if anything, should be done > to os.path, how about we make a PEP and a standalone implementation of > (1) for now, and leave (2) and everything else for a later PEP.
Why write a PEP at this stage? Just release your proposal as a module, and see if people use it. If they do, write a PEP to include it in the stdlib. (That's basically what happened with the original PEP - it started off proposing Jason Orendorff's path module IIRC). >From what you're proposing, I may well use such a module, if it helps :-) (But I'm not sure I'd vote for it in to go the stdlib without having survived as an external module first) Paul. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
