[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 594: update 1

[Christian Tismer]

On 06.06.19 21:27, Brett Cannon wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 12:25 AM Christian Tismer  > wrote:
> 
> On 05.06.19 02:21, Victor Stinner wrote:
> > So what is happening for this PEP since Python 3.8 beta1 has been
> > released? Is it too late for Python 3.8 or not?
> >
> > It seems like most people are confused by the intent of the PEP. IMHO
> > it would be better to rewrite "Remove packages from the stdlib" as
> > "Move some stdlib modules to PyPI". But that would require to rewrite
> > some parts of the PEP to explain how modules are moved, who become the
> > new maintainers, how to support modules both in stdlib (old Python
> > versions) and in PyPI (new Python), etc.
> 
> And I would like to add something as well:
> 
> The stdlib has been a set of well-known modules.
> Maybe not the latest and greatest, but you knew for quite sure
> that these modules are guaranteed to be stable and quite persistent.
> 
> With the move to PyPI, I am missing this promise, partially:
> 
> PyPI has very many good modules, but also some less good ones.
> With the stdlib, you had almost one choice to choose from.
> With PyPI, you have way too many modules, and you have no longer
> the feeling "this seems to be right in BDFL mind".
> 
> I think what is missing is replacement of this feature:
> The set of modules in the stdlib has exactly that being in the
> stdlib as a quality indicator.
> I need now a structure that replaces that quality,
> like
> 
>     "This one is eligible to go into stdlib"
> 
> Do we have such a replacement implemented, already?
> 
> 
> Are you asking for us to bless packages on PyPI as of a quality that the
> core devs approve of it? Or something else? If it's the former we do
> have links pointing to other projects already (e.g. linking to
> 'requests' from
> https://docs.python.org/3/library/urllib.request.html#module-urllib.request).


Yes, I'm asking for blessing some packages.
And I have not spent much time these days with the topic,
so please ignore my uninformed question.

-- 
Christian Tismer :^)   tis...@stackless.com
Software Consulting  : http://www.stackless.com/
Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 121 : https://github.com/PySide
14482 Potsdam: GPG key -> 0xFB7BEE0E
phone +49 173 24 18 776  fax +49 (30) 700143-0023
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 594: update 1

[Brett Cannon]

On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 12:25 AM Christian Tismer 
wrote:

> On 05.06.19 02:21, Victor Stinner wrote:
> > So what is happening for this PEP since Python 3.8 beta1 has been
> > released? Is it too late for Python 3.8 or not?
> >
> > It seems like most people are confused by the intent of the PEP. IMHO
> > it would be better to rewrite "Remove packages from the stdlib" as
> > "Move some stdlib modules to PyPI". But that would require to rewrite
> > some parts of the PEP to explain how modules are moved, who become the
> > new maintainers, how to support modules both in stdlib (old Python
> > versions) and in PyPI (new Python), etc.
>
> And I would like to add something as well:
>
> The stdlib has been a set of well-known modules.
> Maybe not the latest and greatest, but you knew for quite sure
> that these modules are guaranteed to be stable and quite persistent.
>
> With the move to PyPI, I am missing this promise, partially:
>
> PyPI has very many good modules, but also some less good ones.
> With the stdlib, you had almost one choice to choose from.
> With PyPI, you have way too many modules, and you have no longer
> the feeling "this seems to be right in BDFL mind".
>
> I think what is missing is replacement of this feature:
> The set of modules in the stdlib has exactly that being in the
> stdlib as a quality indicator.
> I need now a structure that replaces that quality,
> like
>
> "This one is eligible to go into stdlib"
>
> Do we have such a replacement implemented, already?
>

Are you asking for us to bless packages on PyPI as of a quality that the
core devs approve of it? Or something else? If it's the former we do have
links pointing to other projects already (e.g. linking to 'requests' from
https://docs.python.org/3/library/urllib.request.html#module-urllib.request).
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 594: update 1

[Steve Dower]

On 04Jun2019 1721, Victor Stinner wrote:

So what is happening for this PEP since Python 3.8 beta1 has been
released? Is it too late for Python 3.8 or not?

It seems like most people are confused by the intent of the PEP. IMHO
it would be better to rewrite "Remove packages from the stdlib" as
"Move some stdlib modules to PyPI". But that would require to rewrite
some parts of the PEP to explain how modules are moved, who become the
new maintainers, how to support modules both in stdlib (old Python
versions) and in PyPI (new Python), etc.


I think the problem with this is it sounds like the longer-term plan to 
maintain some stdlib packages independently of the CPython repo, *but 
still include them in the distro* (ensurepip style). This is a much 
broader set of packages that would still be available by default 
(assuming that distributors care about their users) but would also 
benefit from a single code base (rather than 3-4 branches) and being 
independently upgradeable (for backports and/or security fixes). They 
would probably still be managed by core developers, and it may be easier 
to attract new contributors for them since they don't need to manage the 
entire CPython repo.


By contrast, the packages in this PEP are just being deprecated and 
removed. We don't actually have to explain what happens next, and we 
don't have to block the PEP on those discussions.


But perhaps we should go for the big refactor now? Then at least we have 
an explanation for unmaintained packages too - they still show up in 
distros but are not part of the CPython source tree.


Cheers,
Steve
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev(a)python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave(a)python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 594: update 1

[Christian Tismer]

On 05.06.19 02:21, Victor Stinner wrote:
> So what is happening for this PEP since Python 3.8 beta1 has been
> released? Is it too late for Python 3.8 or not?
> 
> It seems like most people are confused by the intent of the PEP. IMHO
> it would be better to rewrite "Remove packages from the stdlib" as
> "Move some stdlib modules to PyPI". But that would require to rewrite
> some parts of the PEP to explain how modules are moved, who become the
> new maintainers, how to support modules both in stdlib (old Python
> versions) and in PyPI (new Python), etc.

And I would like to add something as well:

The stdlib has been a set of well-known modules.
Maybe not the latest and greatest, but you knew for quite sure
that these modules are guaranteed to be stable and quite persistent.

With the move to PyPI, I am missing this promise, partially:

PyPI has very many good modules, but also some less good ones.
With the stdlib, you had almost one choice to choose from.
With PyPI, you have way too many modules, and you have no longer
the feeling "this seems to be right in BDFL mind".

I think what is missing is replacement of this feature:
The set of modules in the stdlib has exactly that being in the
stdlib as a quality indicator.
I need now a structure that replaces that quality,
like

"This one is eligible to go into stdlib"

Do we have such a replacement implemented, already?

-- 
Christian Tismer :^)   tis...@stackless.com
Software Consulting  : http://www.stackless.com/
Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 121 : https://github.com/PySide
14482 Potsdam: GPG key -> 0xFB7BEE0E
phone +49 173 24 18 776  fax +49 (30) 700143-0023
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev(a)python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave(a)python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 594: update 1

[Steve Holden]

Perhaps if PEP 594 is seen to be moving ahead towards a slimmer Python (4?)
stdlib, it might encourage the development of a PEP to take over
maintenance of dead parrots. They might be recruited by the offer of some
way to at least publish a supported bundle via the same (python.org) site
that Python itself comes from. It would seem unfair to burden the PEP with
promising an afterlife. That would raise quality assurance issues, though.

If no such PEP emerges then the dead parrots will be buried and forgotten.
I see little reason why we (Python users) shouldn't trust the collective
python-dev wisdom on what ultimately belongs in stdlib, and heaven knows
these aren't simple discussions.


On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 6:56 PM Brett Cannon  wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 5:22 PM Victor Stinner  wrote:
>
>> So what is happening for this PEP since Python 3.8 beta1 has been
>> released? Is it too late for Python 3.8 or not?
>>
>> It seems like most people are confused by the intent of the PEP. IMHO
>> it would be better to rewrite "Remove packages from the stdlib" as
>> "Move some stdlib modules to PyPI". But that would require to rewrite
>> some parts of the PEP to explain how modules are moved, who become the
>> new maintainers, how to support modules both in stdlib (old Python
>> versions) and in PyPI (new Python), etc.
>>
>
> Correct, that is more than a title change but a shift in what the PEP's
> final result is. And the title as it currently stands as the modules would
> still be removed from the stdlib regardless of whether they end up on PyPI
> or not.
> Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev(a)python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave(a)python.org
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev(a)python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave(a)python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 594: update 1

[Brett Cannon]

On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 5:22 PM Victor Stinner  wrote:

> So what is happening for this PEP since Python 3.8 beta1 has been
> released? Is it too late for Python 3.8 or not?
>
> It seems like most people are confused by the intent of the PEP. IMHO
> it would be better to rewrite "Remove packages from the stdlib" as
> "Move some stdlib modules to PyPI". But that would require to rewrite
> some parts of the PEP to explain how modules are moved, who become the
> new maintainers, how to support modules both in stdlib (old Python
> versions) and in PyPI (new Python), etc.
>

Correct, that is more than a title change but a shift in what the PEP's
final result is. And the title as it currently stands as the modules would
still be removed from the stdlib regardless of whether they end up on PyPI
or not.
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev(a)python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave(a)python.org
Unsubscribe:  https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/