On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 09:17:02 +1300, Robert Collins <robe...@robertcollins.net> wrote: > On 26 November 2015 at 08:57, Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote: > > There's a lot to process in this thread, but as I see it, the issue breaks > > down to these questions: > > > > * How should PEP 493 be implemented? > > > > * What should the default be? > > > > * How should PEP 493 be worded to express the right tone to redistributors? > > > > Let me take on the implementation details here. > > > > On Nov 24, 2015, at 04:04 PM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > > > >>I would still find having built-in support for the recommendations > >>in the Python stdlib a better approach > > > > As would I. > > For what its worth: a PEP telling distributors to patch the standard > library is really distasteful to me. > > We've spent a long time trying to build close relations such that when > something doesn't work distributors can share their needs with us and > we can make Python out of the box be a good fit. This seems to fly in > the exact opposite direction: we're explicitly making it so that > Python builds on these vendor's platforms will not be the same as you > get by checking out the Python source code.
I think we should include the environment variable support in CPython and be done with it (nuke the PEP otherwise). Which is what I've thought from the beginning :) --David _______________________________________________ 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
