On Thu, 02 Dec 2010 23:21:25 +0100 "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de> wrote: > Am 02.12.2010 22:54, schrieb Michael Foord: > > On 02/12/2010 21:39, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > >>> I was told not to touch to Distutils code to avoid any regression > >>> since it's patched to the bones in third party products. So we decided > >>> to freeze distutils and add all new features in Distutils2, which is > >>> at alpha stage now. So this move seems contradictory to me. > >> I think it was a bad decision to freeze distutils, and "we" certainly > >> didn't make that (not any we that includes me, that is). This freeze > >> made the situation worse. > > > > What situation worse? > > The "distutils is unmaintained" situation. It's not only unmaintained > now, but proposed improvements are rejected without consideration, on > the grounds that they are changes.
I think distutils is simply a bugfix branch for distutils2. Similarly as how we don't commit improvements in e.g. 2.7 or 3.1, neither do we commit improvements to distutils. (and I think that's how Guido wanted it anyway) Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ 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
