RetroSearch Browse

Fri May 24 02:55:44 EDT 2019 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2019-May/157677.html

I don't know if this is a good idea or a terrible idea or somewhere in 
between, so I'm throwing it out to see if anyone likes it.

Let's add a third option to PEP 594 between "keep" and "remove": 
explicitly flagging a module as unmaintained. Unmaintained modules:

- will raise a warning when imported that they are unmaintained;

- will have their tests disabled;

- possibly we move them into a seperate namespace: 
  ``from unmaintained import aardvark``

- bug reports without patches will be closed Will Not Fix;

- bug reports with patches *may* be accepted if some core dev is 
  willing to review and check it in, but there is no obligation
  to do so;

- should it turn out that someone is willing to maintain the module,
  it can be returned to regular status.

Plus side:

- reduce the maintenance burden (if any) from the module;

- while still distributing the module and allowing users to use 
  it: "no promises, but here you go";

- other implementations are under no obligation to distribute
  unmaintained modules.

Minus side:

- this becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy: with tests turned off,
  bit-rot will eventually set in and break modules that currently
  aren't broken.

Thoughts?

-- 
Steven

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2019-May/157677.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 594 - a proposal for unmaintained modules