On 16 July 2013 13:02, Chris McDonough <chr...@plope.com> wrote: > OSS developers have spent many months jumping through bw incompat hoops > in Python over the last few years, and it has taken time away from doing > things that provide value. The less I can do of that, the better, and > Python gets more value too. That said, I realize that I'm in the > minority because I happen to have a metric ton of public code out there. > But it'd be nice if that was encouraged rather than effectively punished > on the hunch that it might provide some benefit for a theoretical new > user.
You, Armin and everyone else that works on the bytes/text boundary are indeed the hardest hit by the Python 3 transition, and I appreciate the hard work you have all done to help make that transition as successful as it has been so far. However, the fact that people abuse PEP 8 by treating it as "all Python code in the world should follow these rules" cannot, and will not, stop us from continuing to use it to set appropriate guidelines *for the standard library*. I'll look into adding some stronger wording at the top making it clear that while PEP 8 is a useful starting point and a good default if a project doesn't have a defined style guide of it's own, it is *not* the be-all-and-end-all for Python style guides. Treating it as such as an abuse of the PEP, pure and simple. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ 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/archive%40mail-archive.com