On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Brett Cannon <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 12:19, Jesse Noller <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Brett Cannon <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 11:56, Jesse Noller <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Barry Warsaw <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On Sep 14, 2009, at 11:35 AM, Paul Moore wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Please remember that some establishments have restrictions that mean >>>>>> that tools like easy_install or pip cannot be used. In locked-down >>>>>> corporate environments, python-full is potentially all that will be >>>>>> available (and maybe very specific "blessed" environment-specific 3rd >>>>>> party modules). >>>>> >>>>> Splitting things out for developers is not the same as keeping that split >>>>> visible for distributions, either via tarball, binary from us, or through >>>>> distros. In fact, I'd venture to guess that most locked down >>>>> establishments >>>>> are not going to be installing Python from us; they'll get it through >>>>> their >>>>> operating system vendor (well, thank goodness I don't have to know what >>>>> locked down Windows users have to go through ;). >>>>> >>>>> Still, there's no reason why we couldn't ship sumo packages with all those >>>>> batteries included again. >>>>> >>>>> -Barry >>>> >>>> Yup; that was spelled out in the OP - I would like: core, stdlib, >>>> everything as 3 packages. 99% of people will download the 3rd. >>> >>> Just to toss in my opinion, I think the standard library should be >>> broken out in the VCS to make it very obvious what all Python VMs >>> should come with and work with, but I don't think we should package it >>> up for distribution separately. CPython should probably shift to >>> having a slightly less stranglehold on the standard library than it >>> has now. This would also help legitimize the other VMs. >>> >>> But I see no benefit for the general populace in having a version of >>> Python w/o a standard library. Anyone who has funky space requirements >>> can just do the leg work needed prune down the standard library to >>> what they need. >>> >>> -Brett >>> >> >> Yeah: Except for those people that means custom compiling an >> interpreter too. The tight coupling is just painful. When I want to >> trim the standard library, I should not have to hack the build >> scripts, compile an interpreter, etc, etc. >> >> I'm really strongly (duh) for massive decoupling between the two, >> especially within the build system. >> > > Decoupling in the build system is a good idea and would naturally > happen if we broke out the standard library in the VCS.
\o/ >> How is there any harm in offering 3 downloads? The obvious thing is to >> click on the big "get some pythons on" button which gets what we know >> as python today. >> >> Then there are two little buttons: get "just this" or "just that". > > Because I don't want to have to start telling people "download the > full Python distribution, not the interpreter-only one; that's only > for those folk who want to stuff Python on an embedded device." That > seems silly. And you know some newbie will screw up, download only the > interpreter version and wonder why he can't import some module. The > amount of people who are going to screw up on what to download will > most likely be larger than the people who are going to save some time > downloading just the interpreter instead of having to tweak something > for an embedded device. > > -Brett > What if the font for the "only get dis" is really, really small? Or on a different "advanced yo" page? We could put it in the developer's FAQ - no one reads that ;) _______________________________________________ stdlib-sig mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/stdlib-sig
