On Oct 28, 2010, at 12:08 PM, Jim Fulton wrote: >BTW, I really don't care about certain types of innovation (e.g. file >locations, wide unicode) as long as I as a developer don't feel them. >It occurs to me that it would be useful if there was a definition of a >standard Python that provided a baseline that developers could count >on. Today, the closest thing to a standard is the Python distribution. >I suppose that doesn't have to be the standard. Of course, defining >such a standard might be really painful, especially via email. It might >be a good PyCon discussion/sprint topic.
We should do this. The "System Python" has too many competing OS-specific
constraints that pretty much ensure it will always be idiosyncratic. FWIW, in
Debian/Ubuntu, we're at least trying to *document* some of those issues:
http://wiki.debian.org/Python
I'm supportive of an effort to define "Clean Python" as a separate "thing"
that you can install in parallel and use as a better base for your third party
application deployment. To be most useful, I think this should be as similar
and predictable as possible across distributions. Of course, it gets harder
still when you want to extend that to cross-OS/platform.
But maybe there's still something we can do here. We should put this on the
agenda for Pycon. Would the language summit be an appropriate forum (at least
as a start)?
-Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
