[Web-SIG] Removal of Cookie in Python 3.0 OK?

[Guido van Rossum]

On Feb 4, 2008 5:07 PM, Stephan Richter <srichter at cosmos.phy.tufts.edu> wrote:
> On Monday 04 February 2008, Jim Fulton wrote:
> > Breeds are constantly evolving.  I don't think it's realistic for the
> > standard library to try to keep up.  I also don't think it's a very
> > good idea for language maintainers to make judgements about what's
> > best in various application areas.
> >
> > I have the impression that there's this fairly large effort for people
> > to redo lots of the standard library for Python 3, without necessarily
> > knowing a lot about the libraries' histories, and motivation. I;m
> > skeptical that this is going to lead to a high-quality product.
> >
> > I'd much rather see language developers put some focus on making a low-
> > level feature like a packaging system work as well as possible.
>
> Amen to that. :-)

Sorry, but this is absurd. Packaging systems require a *very*
different skill set and experience than language and library design. I
think it's fair to give the language and library developers hints
about which modules you want to keep, and why, and I believe all Brett
did at the start of this thread was ask for feedback about a
particular proposed module removal. He got it. AFAIK he hasn't pushed
back. That should be the end of the story. But requesting that the
*language* developers work on a packaging system is likely to give
even worse results than expecting the language developers always to
know how library modules are being used.

And if you want to help, please join the stdlib-sig, rather than
whining off-line!

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)