Reinvent no more forever

[Phillip J. Eby]

Ben Finney wrote:
>   - Proliferation. What's the protocol when[1] someone else puts an
>     (incompatible, differently-specified) Enum implementation into
>     PyPI?

Either one of the two will be judged better, and the other will wither
away, or else each will be better for different circumstances, and
different people will use them.  Either way, not a problem.


>   - Naming. How many ways can a package providing an Enum be named?
>     I'd prefer mine to be named "Enum" or "enum", but why should mine
>     be the one that claims that name?

If you feel badly about it, just call it BFEnum, or SuperEnum, or make
up some other "branding" to use for your packages.  Otherwise, take the
rightful spoils of the pioneer by staking your claim to the name.  :)


>   - It's just a pretty simple type, with unit tests. Does this really
>     justify a PyPI package?

Yes.  Excellent documentation would be a plus, of course, and perhaps
one of those screencasts that seem to be all the rage nowadays.  ;)


> I'd love to follow the mantra PJE espouses, but if it's good for one
> person it's probably good for countless others. How do we deal with
> that? What actions can we take in advance to prevent problems in
> future?

It's simple, really.  Ridicule and scorn are quite effective behavior
modification techniques for a community to employ in furthering its
operational goals.  So, when people step out of line, we'll just make
fun of them until they conform.  :)


> [1] Of course, someone already has. I prefer mine to theirs, hence the
> question.

Okay, so call yours "SuperEnum" or "PowerEnum" or "UltraEnum" or
"BetterEnum", "Enum-O-Matic", "Symbolitron"...

or just think about *why* yours is better, for *whom* it's better, and
*when*, and then give it a name that emphasizes one or more of those
things.  Even though "all the good domain names are taken", there still
seem to be an infinity of names remaining.  That's also true for PyPI.