Python component model

[Kay Schluehr]

Paul Boddie wrote:

> I've never maintained that a monopoly on how Web programming is done
> would be a good thing. All I've ever tried to understand is why people
> haven't tried to improve the generic support for Web programming (and a
> whole load of other things) even to the level of something like the
> DB-API. Take another area: all the time you get people asking how they
> can conveniently access some Web site using a Python-based client, and
> loads of people are coming up against issues with urllib, urllib2,
> other libraries. Wouldn't it be good if the functionality were just
> there in the standard library in a sane form? Or is the standard
> library just a "grab bag" of demos these days?

Paul, I do think the focus on the stdlib as it is right now is a bit
misleading. The stdlib is basically the product of python-dev and the
runtime developers also have maintenance responsibility. This shall and
even must be splitted and shared as it is done successfully with
application domains like Scientific Python. If an enterprise grows no
one expects that one department is responsible for everything but here
in the Python community Guido shall play Fidel Castro who cares for
each module of each application developer ever written and its
suitability for the stdlib and its alignment with the Python ideology.
In my opinion Python shall grow up and organize the visibility of its
products, its "portfolio", differently with Py3K. I agree with Fredrik
that any decision towards a BDFL blessed webframework is premature and
Guido already showed himself not much interest in making any decision.
Even if all kinds of components are available in the stdlib people are
still looking for a RoR for Python and they do so not only for
technical reasons but because they need a brand that can be justifed
towards their team mates and project leaders. 

Kay