[Python-ideas] Increasing public package discoverability (was: Adding jsonschema to the standard library)

[Demian Brecht]

> On May 27, 2015, at 11:55 AM, Ian Cordasco <graffatcolmingov at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> The mirror of this would be asking if Django should rip out it's base
> classes for models, views, etc.  I think Python 4 could move towards
> perhaps deprecating any duplicated modules, but I see no point to rip
> the entire standard library out... except maybe for
> httplib/urllib/etc. (for various reasons beyond my obvious conflict of
> interest).

I can somewhat see the comparison, but not entirely because Django itself is a package and not the core interpreter and set of builtins. There are also other frameworks that split out modules from the core (I’m not overly familiar with either, but I believe both zope and wheezy follow such models).

The major advantage of going with a fully distributed model would be the out-of-band releases. While nice to have for feature development, it can be crucial for bug fixes, but even more so for security patches. Other than that, I could see it opening the door to adoption of packages as “recommended” without worrying too much about state of development. requests is a perfect example of that. Note that my personal focus on standard library development is the http package so I’m somewhat cutting my legs out from under me, but I’m starting to think that adopting such a distribution mechanism might solve a number of problems (but is probably just as likely to introduce new ones ;)).

I’m also aware of the politics of such a change. What does it mean then for core devs who concentrate on the current standard library and don’t contribute to the interpreter core or builtins?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/attachments/20150527/050c4413/attachment.sig>