On 29 June 2015 at 20:52, Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote: > On 29 June 2015 at 10:26, Paul Sokolovsky <[email protected]> wrote: >> and yet we're stuck at the old base PEPs which >> overlooked providing stream access protocol for package resources >> access. > > The PEP did not "overlook" stream access. Rather, the compatibility > constraints and the need to support existing code meant that we needed > to ensure that we required the minimal possible interface from > loaders. Even get_data was an optional interface. > > In practice, many of the constraints around at the time no longer > apply, and zip and filesystem loaders remain the most common examples, > so the conservative approach of PEP 302 can be revisited (as I said). > But someone needs to step up and manage such a change before it will > happen.
And active import system experts are even thinner on the ground than packaging experts :) It's good to hear Brett's planning to dive into this for 3.6, though. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [email protected] | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
