On 26 November 2015 at 08:57, Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote: > There's a lot to process in this thread, but as I see it, the issue breaks > down to these questions: > > * How should PEP 493 be implemented? > > * What should the default be? > > * How should PEP 493 be worded to express the right tone to redistributors? > > Let me take on the implementation details here. > > On Nov 24, 2015, at 04:04 PM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > >>I would still find having built-in support for the recommendations >>in the Python stdlib a better approach > > As would I.
For what its worth: a PEP telling distributors to patch the standard library is really distasteful to me. We've spent a long time trying to build close relations such that when something doesn't work distributors can share their needs with us and we can make Python out of the box be a good fit. This seems to fly in the exact opposite direction: we're explicitly making it so that Python builds on these vendor's platforms will not be the same as you get by checking out the Python source code. Ugh. -Rob -- Robert Collins <rbtcoll...@hp.com> Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
