GUIs - A Modest Proposal

[rantingrick]

On Jun 10, 1:56 pm, Stephen Hansen <me+list/pyt... at ixokai.io> wrote:

> So... uh, why again are we including it? Those people who need it, have
> ready access.

But what if Mark decided one day he no longer wants to support Python
or Win32? How many years will it be before someone writes another?

> Why not include wxPython <snip>
> Why not include PyQT? <snip>

Both are not-starters for many reasons already discussed in this
thread. Maybe wax would have a chance if we made it more Pythonic as
Greg pointed out. All others are a non-starter due to the zen (import
this).

> Again: it has nothing at all to do with people not liking GUI's or
> thinking GUI's are going the way of the dodo. It has to do with people's
> ideas of what should or should not go in the standard library. Generally
> speaking? Stuff that everyone or most people can make ready use of...
> and while yes, doing GUI development is very, very common -- "GUI
> development" is not a single monolithic thing. Different people have
> some *very* different needs for what they get out of their GUI development.

And again the opponents miss the whole point. It's not about including
a GUI that would make everyone happy. Its about including a GUI that
is complimentary to Python's stated goals. Not for you, Not for me,
Not for the x&lee... remember? ;-)

> The reason we do not embed any 'better' GUI then Tkinter into the
> stdlib? There's several tools available for the job: and there is no
> clear indication or agreement that one is better or more qualified for
> inclusion over the others. At least, IMHO. I do not speak for python-dev.

So i guess then the question becomes... Why keep supporting it? It's
time to say Bye-Bye to Tkinter.

> There is clearly no "our" Python.

i beg to differ my friend.

> PyGUI is indeed a solid project, and perhaps-- eventually-- a contender
> for replacing Tkinter, once it works the kinks out and matures. Maybe it
> is almost mature enough now? Maybe it needs more help? If so-- your time
> would be better spent downloading it, using it, and offering some
> patches

I am in the process of that right now!

> Things don't go into the stdlib to mature.

Agreed! And likewise "things" should not be left to clutter the stdlib
needlessly only to wither and die a slow death just because no one has
the vision (or the motivation) to fix them or remove them for the sake
of Python's evolution.