RetroSearch Browse

Mon Jan 7 00:35:06 CET 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-January/075941.html

On Jan 6, 2008 3:28 PM, Oleg Broytmann <phd at phd.pp.ru> wrote:
>    Now I think - if we don't want a separate Python's top-level namespace
> may be we should think about a separate top-level non-Python's (3rd
> parties') namespace? With it we could have database.sqlite (Python's
> sqlite) and user.database.sqlite (a newer version); and by doing import
> database.sqlite you know exactly what version you are importing.

Bleh.

I'm +1 on allowing third-party additions to the same 'database'
namespace that the stdlib puts packages in. People will just have to
get used to the package, and not the namespace, determining who to
complain to.

In theory, it might make sense to allow libraries to "close" some
namespaces to deal with Brett's worry, but I think the consenting
adults rule says not to bother.

-- 
Namasté,
Jeffrey Yasskin

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-January/075941.html below:

[Python-Dev] pkgutil, pkg_resource and Python 3.0 name space packages