Paul Moore wrote:
2009/9/14 Doug Hellmann <doug.hellm...@gmail.com>:
In thinking about this even more over the past year(ish) - I've
wondered if the stdlib, and python-core should actually be *really*
separated. I'm a huge fan of batteries included, but I can see the
draw to a breakdown like this:
python-core (no stdlib, interpreter, core language)
python-stdlib (no core)
python-full (the works)
It would be interesting to know what stdlib modules are a minimum
requirement to install other packages with a tool like easy_install or pip.
Those might need to stay in "core" so that installing core gives a
minimally functional system.
Otherwise, I like the idea.
Please remember that some establishments have restrictions that mean
that tools like easy_install or pip cannot be used. In locked-down
corporate environments, python-full is potentially all that will be
available (and maybe very specific "blessed" environment-specific 3rd
party modules).
But if the stdlib can be split out in such a way that it doesn't
adversely impact those environments, then maybe the extra flexibility
to evolve it would be helpful. (I'd like to know how that aligns with
the stated goal of stdlib stability, though - seems to me like it's
one or the other...)
For reference, where is that stated?
Michael
Paul.
_______________________________________________
stdlib-sig mailing list
stdlib-sig@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/stdlib-sig
--
http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/blog
_______________________________________________
stdlib-sig mailing list
stdlib-sig@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/stdlib-sig
