On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 16:50:22 -0400 Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote:
> On Sep 23, 2013, at 09:15 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > >With the last round of updates, I believe PEP 453 is ready for > >Martin's pronouncement. > > I want to raise an objection to PEP's proposal to add this as a new feature to > Python 2.7 and 3.3. I understand the rationale as stated here: > > http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0453/#id38 > > but I still object. ;) > > I think we've learned it's generally pretty risky to add new features in point > releases, and this is a fairly major (and would be the first?) violation of > the principal of Python 2.7's conservative maintenance. > > At the very least, I'd like to know why there's no other alternative. For > example, you could provide a PyPI package with this functionality, and let the > binary packagers adopt it into their binary packages, for platforms that care. > > So for example, Linux systems which start from the source tarball could opt > out (by doing nothing special) since there are other ways to achieve a similar > benefit. For OS X and Windows users getting binary downloads from > www.python.org, I think it would be acceptable if the .dmg or .msi included > this external package. If it's bundled in the official binary installers, it makes little sense not to add to the source tree, IMHO. First because most people get one of the installers rather than the source tree (on http://www.python.org/webstats/, MSI builds win by ten to one). Second because the few people who get the source tree are experienced users who will get bitten less by hypothetical quirks or oddities. Third because otherwise we're probably making things harder for our beloved packagers ;-) Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
