On Sat, Dec 1, 2018, 06:56 Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com wrote: > We* should probably do more collectively to point people at > production-quality third-party modules, as I believe we currently do with > pipenv which, while not a part of the standard library, is still > recommended in the documentation as the preferred method of dependency > management. > Small correction: the only "official" recommendation for pipenv is that packaging.python.org (which is maintained by pypa, not python-dev) contains several tutorials, and one of them discusses how to use pipenv. For a while Kenneth used this as justification for telling everyone pipenv was "the officially recommended install tool", and this created a lot of ill will, so the pipenv team has been working on rolling that back. A better precedent is requests. There was a long discussion a few years ago about whether requests should move to the stdlib, and the outcome was that it didn't, but the urllib docs got a note added recommending the use of requests, which you can see here: https://docs.python.org/3/library/urllib.request.html#module-urllib.request Personally I would have phrased the note more strongly, but my perspective is skewed by having tried to understand the internals. I'm glad urllib has helped a lot of people solve their problems, but there's also a lot of ways that it's flat out broken. Anyway, I agree that there are probably other places where the docs could use this technique. -n -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20181201/ddf7a0ae/attachment.html>
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