On 27 May 2010 16:56, Stephen J. Turnbull <step...@xemacs.org> wrote:
> We'll just have to agree to disagree, then. Plenty of evidence has > been provided; it just doesn't happen to apply to you. Fine, but I > wish you'd make the "to me" part explicit, because I know that it does > apply to others, many of them, from their personal testimony, both > related to XEmacs and to Python. Sorry, you're right. There's a very strong "to me" in all of this, but I more or less assumed it was obvious, as I was originally responding to comments implying that a sumo distribution was a solution to a problem I stated that I have. In trying to trim things, and keep things concise, I completely lost the context. My apologies. > I wouldn't recommend building a production system on top of a sumo in > any case. But (given resources to maintain multiple Python development > installations) it is a good environment for experimentation, because > not only batteries but screwdrivers and duct tape are supplied. That's an interesting perspective that I hadn't seen mentioned before. For experimentation, I'd *love* a sumo distribution as you describe. But I thought this whole discussion focussed around building production systems. For that, the stdlib's quality guarantees are a major benefit, and the costs of locating and validating appropriately high-quality external packages are (sometimes prohibitively) high. But I think I'm getting to the point where I'm adding more confusion than information, so I'll bow out of this discussion at this point. 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
