PEP on path module for standard library

[Reinhold Birkenfeld]

John Roth wrote:
> "Michael Hoffman" <cam.ac.uk at mh391.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:dbofk2$g1f$1 at gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk...
>> Many of you are familiar with Jason Orendorff's path module 
>> <http://www.jorendorff.com/articles/python/path/>, which is frequently 
>> recommended here on c.l.p. I submitted an RFE to add it to the Python 
>> standard library, and Reinhold Birkenfeld started a discussion on it in 
>> python-dev 
>> <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-June/054438.html>.
>>
>> The upshot of the discussion was that many python-dev'ers wanted path 
>> added to the stdlib, but Guido was not convinced and said it must have a 
>> PEP.
> 
> Why did Guido want a PEP? Is it because he likes the idea but
> feels the feature set needs to be examined a bit more by the wider
> community, or is it some other reason?

He said,

"""
Whoa! Do we really need a completely different mechanism for doing the
same stuff we can already do? The path module seems mostly useful for
folks coming from Java who are used to the Java Path class. With the
massive duplication of functionality we should also consider what to
recommend for the future: will the old os.path module be deprecated,
or are we going to maintain both alternatives forever? (And what about
all the duplication with the os module itself, like the cwd()
constructor?) Remember TOOWTDI.
"""

Reinhold