RetroSearch Browse

Thu Apr 7 01:08:53 EDT 2016 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-April/143746.html

> On Apr 5, 2016, at 3:55 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> 
> It's been provisional since 3.4. I think if it is still there in 3.6.0
> it should be considered no longer provisional. But this may indeed be
> a test case for the ultimate fate of provisional modules -- should we
> remove it?

I lean slightly towards for removal. 

Having worked through the API when it is first released, I find it to be highly forgettable (i.e. I have to re-read the docs each time I've revisited it).

While I haven't seen any uptake in real code, there are occasional questions about it on StackOverflow, so we do know that there is at least some interest.  I'm not sure that it needs to live in the standard library though.

Raymond

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-April/143746.html below:

[Python-Dev] When should pathlib stop being provisional?