Python 3.0 migration plans?

[George Sakkis]

On Sep 28, 11:53 am, John Nagle <na... at animats.com> wrote:

> Alex Martelli wrote:
> > John Nagle <na... at animats.com> wrote:
>
> >> TheFlyingDutchman wrote:
> >>> It seems that Python 3 is more significant for what it removes than
> >>> what it adds.
>
> >>> What are the additions that people find the most compelling?
> >>     I'd rather see Python 2.5 finished, so it just works.
>
> > And I'd rather see peace on Earth and goodwill among men than _either_
> > Python 3 or your cherished "finished" 2.5 -- the comparison and implied
> > tradeoff make about as much sense as yours.
>
>      Insofar as Python has an organization, it's not adequately managing
> extension modules.  Each extension module has its own infrastructure,
> with its own build procedures, its own bug list, and its own maintainers.
> There's not even an archive.  Unlike CPAN, Cheese Shop is just a directory of
> URLs.
>
>      Take a look at how Perl does it.  Here are the instructions on
> how to contribute to CPAN:
>
>        http://www.cpan.org/modules/04pause.html
>
> There's a way to get your module into the system, a standardized format,
> build, and installation procedure, and an archive which is mirrored.
> There's a common bug reporting system.  Modules abandoned by their
> original developers are not lost, and can be "adopted" by someone else.
>
>      Python doesn't have any of this.  And that's far more of a problem
> than Python 3.x.

Does Perl support extension modules, and if so, are they so prevalent
as in Python ? Either case, bringing up CPAN is moot in this case;
nothing can force an external open source contributor to maintain or
provide binaries for his packages. How is this a problem of the
*language* ?

George