On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 01:59:56PM -0400, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 5/21/2019 9:01 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > ... > >Many Python users don't have the privilege of being able to install > >arbitrary, unvetted packages from PyPI. They get to use only packages > >from approved vendors, including the stdlib, what they write themselves, > >and nothing else. Please don't dismiss this part of the Python community > >just because they don't typically hang around in the same forums we do. > ... > > The problem with this argument, taken by itself, it that it would argue > for adding to the stdlib 100s or 1000s of modules or packages that would > be useful to many more people than the modules proposed to be dropped.
No -- taken *by itself* it is only an argument against removing what already exists (or at least to be conservative in what we remove). That is all I'm saying. It requires an *additional* argument that we add anything new, and I'm not making that argument here. The additional argument is valid as a counter to "just put it on PyPI". The argument goes like this: - if we agree that the aardvark module is useful and appropriate for the std lib (not every useful module is, for many reasons!) we could still decide not to add it; - if we add it to the std lib, it will be available to 100% of users of the std lib; - but if we say "put it on PyPI", it will only be available to (let's say) 85% of users. But I'm not making that argument here because I'm not asking to add anything. -- Steven _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com