Brian Curtin wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 14:13, Kenneth Reitz <me@kennethreitz.com> wrote:
>> I think the cheesehop trove classifiers would be the ideal way to
>> agnostically link to a page of packages related to the standard package in
>> question. No need for sort order.
>
> Randomize the order for all I care. We still need to ensure we're
> suggesting quality projects. It doesn't make sense for us to suggest
> alternatives that we wouldn't want to use ourselves by just polling
> some list that anyone can get on.
"Need" is awfully strong. I don't believe it is the responsibility of the
standard library to be judge and reviewer of third party packages that it
doesn't control.
-1 on adding *any* sort of recommendations about third-party software except,
at most, a case-by-case basis where absolutely necessary.
What problem are we actually trying to solve here? Do we think that there are
users who really have no clue where to find 3rd party software AND don't know
how to use Google, BUT read the Python docs? I find it difficult to believe
that there are people who both read the docs and are so clueless that they
need to be told that there are alternatives available and which they should be
using.
Personally I think this is a solution in search of a problem. Judging by the
python-tutor mailing list, even *beginners* know that they aren't limited to
the stdlib and how to go about finding third party software. There are many
more questions about PyGame and wxPython than there are about tkinter. There
are plenty of questions about numpy. There are lots of questions about niche
packages I'd never even heard of.
I simply don't think there is any evidence that there are appreciable numbers
of Python coders, beginners or expert, who need to be told about third party
software. Who are these people we're trying to reach out to?
> This is documentation that receives hundreds of thousands of views a
> month*. We need to be picky about what goes in it.
Exactly why we should be wary of recommending specific packages.
Should we recommend wxPython over Pyjamas or PyGUI or PyGtk? On what basis?
Whatever choice we make is going to be wrong for some people, and is
potentially unfair to the maintainers of the packages left out. Should we
recommend them all? That's no help to anyone. Make no recommendation at all?
That's the status quo.
What counts as "best of breed" can change rapidly -- software churn is part of
the reason that the packages aren't in the stdlib in the first place. It can
also be a matter of taste and convention. There are a few non-brainers, like
numpy, but everything else, no, let's not open this can of worms.
I can see no benefit to this suggestion, and all sorts of ways that this might
go badly.
--
Steven
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/list-python-dev%40lists.gossamer-threads.com
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 14:13, Kenneth Reitz <me@kennethreitz.com> wrote:
>> I think the cheesehop trove classifiers would be the ideal way to
>> agnostically link to a page of packages related to the standard package in
>> question. No need for sort order.
>
> Randomize the order for all I care. We still need to ensure we're
> suggesting quality projects. It doesn't make sense for us to suggest
> alternatives that we wouldn't want to use ourselves by just polling
> some list that anyone can get on.
"Need" is awfully strong. I don't believe it is the responsibility of the
standard library to be judge and reviewer of third party packages that it
doesn't control.
-1 on adding *any* sort of recommendations about third-party software except,
at most, a case-by-case basis where absolutely necessary.
What problem are we actually trying to solve here? Do we think that there are
users who really have no clue where to find 3rd party software AND don't know
how to use Google, BUT read the Python docs? I find it difficult to believe
that there are people who both read the docs and are so clueless that they
need to be told that there are alternatives available and which they should be
using.
Personally I think this is a solution in search of a problem. Judging by the
python-tutor mailing list, even *beginners* know that they aren't limited to
the stdlib and how to go about finding third party software. There are many
more questions about PyGame and wxPython than there are about tkinter. There
are plenty of questions about numpy. There are lots of questions about niche
packages I'd never even heard of.
I simply don't think there is any evidence that there are appreciable numbers
of Python coders, beginners or expert, who need to be told about third party
software. Who are these people we're trying to reach out to?
> This is documentation that receives hundreds of thousands of views a
> month*. We need to be picky about what goes in it.
Exactly why we should be wary of recommending specific packages.
Should we recommend wxPython over Pyjamas or PyGUI or PyGtk? On what basis?
Whatever choice we make is going to be wrong for some people, and is
potentially unfair to the maintainers of the packages left out. Should we
recommend them all? That's no help to anyone. Make no recommendation at all?
That's the status quo.
What counts as "best of breed" can change rapidly -- software churn is part of
the reason that the packages aren't in the stdlib in the first place. It can
also be a matter of taste and convention. There are a few non-brainers, like
numpy, but everything else, no, let's not open this can of worms.
I can see no benefit to this suggestion, and all sorts of ways that this might
go badly.
--
Steven
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/list-python-dev%40lists.gossamer-threads.com