> > Marc-Andre grabbed "mx". If (as I rather suspect <wink>) he > > wants to remake the entire standard lib in his image, he's > > welcome to - *under* mx. > > Right, that's the way I see it too. BTW, where can I register > the "mx" top-level package name ? Should these be registered > in the NIST registry ? Will the names registered there be > honored ? I think the NIST registry is a failed experiment -- too cumbersome to maintain or consult. We can do this the same way as common law handles trade marks: if you have used it as your brand name long enough, even if you didn't register, someone else cannot grab it away from you. > > What would happen if he (and everyone else) installed > > themselves *into* my core packages, then I decided I didn't > > want his stuff? More than likely I'd have to scrub the damn > > installation and start all over again. > > That's a no-no, IMHO. Unless explicitly allowed, packages > should *not* install themselves as subpackages to other > existing top-level packages. If they do, its their problem > if the hierarchy changes... Agreed. Although some people seem to *want* this. Probably because it's okay to do that in Java and (apparently?) in Perl. And C++, probably. It all probably stems back to Lisp. I admit that I didn't see this subtlety when I designed Python's package architecture. It's too late to change (e.g. because of __init__.py). Is it a problem though? Let's be open-minded about this and think about whether we want to allow this or not, and why... --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4