Hi Nick, Please don't, since that would force everyone to start using PEP 648 just > to extend sys.path, which would be just as bad as the status quo.
I think Barry is referring to deprecate the execution capabilities of pth files (https://bugs.python.org/issue33944), not the files themselves. Cheers, Pablo Galindo Salgado On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 00:34, Nick Coghlan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021, 3:15 am Barry Warsaw, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> . We would like to eventually go farther, including deprecation of pth >> files entirely, but that is outside the scope of this PEP. >> > > Please don't, since that would force everyone to start using PEP 648 just > to extend sys.path, which would be just as bad as the status quo. > > Cheers, > Nick. > > > >> _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ > Message archived at > https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/MSOV7NKDCO7L3X46SDDLVTUEN7ER2EDB/ > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ >
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/TZW2UT4B7OUVVZ3YCRHRZNU4HZS7W66R/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
