RetroSearch Browse

Wed Mar 20 20:14:09 CET 2013 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-March/124804.html

2013/3/20 Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org>:
> On Mar 20, 2013, at 11:22 AM, Eli Bendersky wrote:
>
>>IDLE would be a great first foray into this "separate project" world,
>>because it is many ways a separate project.
>
> I really think that's true.  A separate project, occasionally sync'd back into
> the stdlib by a core dev seems like the right way to manage IDLE.

I would advise against this. Basically, every "externally-maintained"
package with have causes pain. For example, the stdlib now has some
long-diverged fork of simplejson. With xml.etree, it was not clear for
years whether core developers could touch it even though the external
project had died. Either the stdlib and IDLE should go separate ways
or development has to happen in the stdlib with CPython release
schedule and policies.

-- 
Regards,
Benjamin

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-March/124804.html below:

[Python-Dev] IDLE in the stdlib