Martijn Faassen <faassen@vet.uu.nl> writes: > [Barry] > > I was going to point David at PEP 2 as the guidelines for getting modules > added to the standard library, but I don't think PEP 2 really describes > current practice. [Martijn] > What PEP 2 tries to supply is a procedure to follow if people > have already decided they would like to try to get a module or set of > modules accepted into the standard library. They can decide this before > or after they write the module; the PEP doesn't care -- as long as the > module is there when they submit the library PEP. At least they know > there'll be Integrators that will review things, and they know they had > better come up with some maintainers before submitting the PEP. I always read the PEP in precisely that way, and I think it is just fine as it stands. *Of course*, the BDFL can decide to incorporate any new modules any time he wants. The PEP is to give people a guideline if they want to get a module "in" that the BDFL doesn't outright want: they need to offer supporting it, and they need to document it, provide test cases, etc - then there is a good chance that the BDFL won't object. This also gives the BDFL the explicit power to remove the module when problems surface with it and the original authors ran away - it essentially ties contributors to their contribution, which I see as a good thing. Regards, Martin
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