I should probably mark that PEP as abandoned or deferred, since for various reasons, it seems like this is not what Python-dev feels is needed [1].
[1] http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-June/090121.html 2009/8/27 Brett Cannon <br...@python.org>: > Is the PEP considering all non-private APIs public even if they are > not documented? If so we might want to be up front about that and say > so to make sure we are all very careful about making all non-essential > APIs private (assuming this PEP gets accepted). > > And we might want to say that all code in 'test' sub-packages are not > subject to backwards compatibility unless documented. I have a ton of > support code in importlib.test that I do not want to have to maintain > for public consumption as they are meant solely for testing purposes > by me. If you read the PEP it would suggest that all modules in test > are subject to the PEP's compatibility policy which is obviously > absurd. > > -Brett > _______________________________________________ > 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/benjamin%40python.org > -- Regards, Benjamin _______________________________________________ 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
