S
Steven Bethard
Reinhold said:
+1 QOTW.
STeVe
+1 QOTW.
STeVe
E
Erik Wilsher
Python developement is discussed, decided and usually developed within
the members of python-dev. Have you seen any discussions about
xml-literals in python-dev lately?
the members of python-dev. Have you seen any discussions about
xml-literals in python-dev lately?
R
Reinhold Birkenfeld
Erik said:
No. I don't need them, so I don't start a discussion. If you need them, or
you want them, feel free to do so.
Reinhold
F
Fredrik Lundh
Reinhold said:
you know, this "you have opinions? **** off!" attitude isn't really helping.
</F>
G
Ganesan Rajagopal
I agree. I am a lurker in this list and the python-devel list and I've also
noticed that increasingly big discussions happen over fairly minor
things. Python's DB API is still stuck at 2.0 and we can't even agree on a
single parameter style while C# is innovating and moving ahead with the "big
picture" stuff.
I mean who really cares what's the exact syntax for the ternary
operator. Python's white space significance was a shock when I first learnt
python. I have learnt to live with it because there are a lot other things
to like about the language. I'll live with whatever final decision on the
ternary syntax or whether "and" and "or" should a boolean or the last
expression.
I'd like to see the DB API move forward, and experimental new innovations
like static typing (with automatic type inferencing), stackless python
etc. If the experiments don't survive, fine. It's still better than
quibbling over minor syntactic detail.
Ganesan
A
A.M. Kuchling
The group of committers is a diverse group of people, and not every one of
them uses a relational database; that effort would be better done on the
DB-SIG mailing list, because the people there presumably do all use an
RDBMS. (Now, if you wanted to include SQLite in core Python, that *would*
be a python-dev topic, and ISTR it's been brought up in the past.)
This is also something the PSF might fund. The next time the PSF calls for
grant proposals, someone could request funding to edit a new revision of the
DB-API.
Agreed; python-dev has gotten pretty boring with all the endless discussions
over some minor point. Of course, it's much easier and lower-effort to
propose a syntax or nitpick a small point issue than to tackle a big
complicated issue like static typing.
Similar things happen on the catalog SIG: people suggest, or even implement,
an automatic package management system, But bring up the question of whether
it should be called PyPI or Cheeseshop or the Catalog, and *everyone* can make
a suggestion.
--amk
R
Richie Hindle
M
Mike Meyer
A.M. Kuchling said:
This is a well-known phenomenon, having picked up the name "bikeshed"
something like 40 years ago. Google for "bikeshed color". Or just
check out the FreeBSD FAQ entry at <URL: http://www.bikeshed.com/ >.
<mike
G
Ganesan Rajagopal
A M Kuchling said:
I would definitely love to see SQLite included in core python. I am a Unix
systems/networking programmer myself. Just like the fact that everything
looks like a database programmers to most database, I've observed that the
reverse is true for non database programmers. In other words, most non RDMS
normally don't think of a database even the solution screams for a
database. I think SQLite does an amazing job in bridging this gap.
You have a point there
. My memory may not be perfect but I remember reading that Python 2.5's focus
is libraries and no language changes. If that's correct, I can understand
why core python folks are more interested in discussing language features
for Python 3000 ;-). Speaking of libraries, I haven't seen many discussions
on libraries in python-dev. Is there some other list with more discussions
on libraries?
Ganesan
S
Steven Bethard
Erik said:
Reinhold said:
Fredrik said:
While I should know better than replying to </F>,
I have to say that I don't think "you have opinions? **** off!" was the intent at all. I
don't know many people who'd argue that we don't need:
* more complete and better organized documentation
* a simpler build/install system
* etc.
But they'll never get done if no one volunteers to work on them.
Recently, I saw a volunteer on python-dev looking to help make the docs
more complete, and he was redirected to the docs SIG to help out. This
is good. I know that there's been a bunch of work on setuptools[1]
that's supposed to be a real improvement on distutils. This is also goood.
But there're only so many man-hours available to work on these projects.
If you see a problem, and you want it fixed, the right thing to do is
to donate some of your time to a project that needs it. This, I
believe, is the essence of Reinhold Birkenfeld's comment.
STeVe
[1]http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/setuptools
R
Reinhold Birkenfeld
Fredrik said:
If I had wanted to say "you have opinions? **** off!", I would have said
"you have opinions? **** off!".
All I wanted to say is that if you want a common documentation format, and
you want it badly, you should show up on python-dev and offer help.
Unfortunately, there are not as many Python core developers as Perl core
developers, and things move at a slower pace. That's mostly not their fault,
and not anyone's fault. It's a consequence of the amount of time that is
spent on Python-the-core itself.
And why? Well, because it's more fun to program in Python than to program Python.
Reinhold
G
Gregory Bond
Mike said:
My favourite "bikeshed" story:
A colleague just joined his local Primary School council. On the agenda
for his first meeting was that the shelter shed needed painting. There
were groans all around and someone said with a loud sigh, "I suppose
we'll have to get the colour consultants back."