[issue29258] __init__.py required for pkgutil.walk_packages in python3

Inada Naoki added the comment: I am totally agree with Wolfgang: > they make it impossible to know whether a directory found on the filesystem > is *intended* as a Python package or not. I think we shouldn't treat normal directory as namespace package until some portion in the directory is

[issue29258] __init__.py required for pkgutil.walk_packages in python3

Change by Inada Naoki : -- assignee: -> docs@python components: +Documentation -Library (Lib) nosy: +docs@python resolution: rejected -> stage: resolved -> needs patch status: closed -> open versions: +Python 3.8, Python 3.9 -Python 3.5, Python 3.6

[issue29258] __init__.py required for pkgutil.walk_packages in python3

Eric Wieser added the comment: If the resolution here is that this is behaving as intended (which personally I disagree with), I think this issue should remain open as a documentation task - the docs should clearly state that this does not apply to PEP420 namespace packages. --

[issue29258] __init__.py required for pkgutil.walk_packages in python3

Inada Naoki added the comment: > PEP420 makes __init__.py files optional This is almost wrong. PEP 420 added a new way for "namespace pacakge." PEP 420 doesn't make empty __init__.py file in regular package. (See https://dev.to/methane/don-t-omit-init-py-3hga) Then, should

[issue29258] __init__.py required for pkgutil.walk_packages in python3

Change by Eric Wieser : -- nosy: +Eric Wieser ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe:

[issue29258] __init__.py required for pkgutil.walk_packages in python3

Changes by Brett Cannon : -- nosy: -brett.cannon ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue29258] __init__.py required for pkgutil.walk_packages in python3

Wolfgang Maier added the comment: > all that's required here is to eliminate the check for __init__.py from > pkgutil._iter_file_finder_modules Ok, I was exaggerating here. To do it right would require a more complex change, but that's all that's needed to get an estimate of the effect the

[issue29258] __init__.py required for pkgutil.walk_packages in python3

Wolfgang Maier added the comment: While it is rather trivial to implement the proposed functionality - all that's required here is to eliminate the check for __init__.py from pkgutil._iter_file_finder_modules - this would have undesired impacts on, e.g., pydoc.apropos: This function would

[issue29258] __init__.py required for pkgutil.walk_packages in python3

Changes by Wolfgang Maier : -- nosy: +wolma ___ Python tracker ___

[issue29258] __init__.py required for pkgutil.walk_packages in python3

Changes by Serhiy Storchaka : -- nosy: +brett.cannon, eric.snow, ncoghlan versions: -Python 3.3, Python 3.4 ___ Python tracker

[issue29258] __init__.py required for pkgutil.walk_packages in python3

New submission from Anthony Sottile: PEP420 makes __init__.py files optional: https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/3.3.html#pep-420-implicit-namespace-packages Though it seems without them, pkgutil.walk_packages does not function as desired: