[Python-3000] pre-PEP: Process for reviewing/improving stdlibmodules in 3.0

[Terry Reedy]

"Guido van Rossum" <guido at python.org> wrote in message 
news:ca471dc20604032029u475e8e7an2b15764d1ccd008e at mail.gmail.com...
>I didn't see any comments on this PEP.

For me, it is pretty clear and sensible, hence not much to say.
Plus I expected others to says whatever was needed ;-).

> I'm not sure that the order in which the
> steps are to be carried out is all that important, nor that it's
> necessary to do this in the same order for all modules,

Such thoughts had occurred to me, but I don't think of anything specific to 
add.  I read the steps as strong guidelines rather than a straightjacket. 
I imagine refinements will grow out of experience.

> but otherwise
> the only thing that bugs me is the reference to the great stdlib
> renaming (which I'm not sure is such a great idea).

This is the main thing that caught my attention since I did not know that 
you had made a decision, which, obviously now, you haven't.  So I would 
break that sentence into two:

There are proposals for a "great stdlib renaming" introducing a hierarchic 
library
namespace.  That possibility aside, some module's names are known ...

And add PEP reference if and when there is a renaming PEP.

> I expect that some of the goals (especially test coverage) are too 
> ambitious,
> but it's worth at least aspiring to great works!

The test coverage goal tells me that there is 'room' for me to contribute 
should I learn to be a good test writer.

Terry Jan Reedy