The State of Python

[Martijn Faassen]

Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
[Martijn asked:]
>> Some hinting as to the 'why' of this confusion in your future announcement
>> would be useful too.

> Sorry, but I really can't help you there.  The decision to change the
> license was made by CNRI, and I can't speak for them.  It would be
> good to request an independent explanation from CNRI, rather than
> expect me to guess what their motivations are.

Okay, but it was initially quite unclear for me and I presume others to figure
out what was going on in the first place. I'm not even sure what form
my 'why' question to CNRI would take:

  Dear CNRI, why did you do this? What'd you do exactly? How come
  you could do it? What's up with these version numbers? Why do you
  want 1.6? What's the deal with the license?

Quite involved, I guess. :)

Perhaps:

  Dear CNRI, what's up with Python??

Anyway, I'll stop breaking my poor little neurons over all of this
right now, assuming it's all resolving itself (as it looks like).
Let's worry about language design instead. We've had a Python
Luddite thread and I do feel some sympathy with that point of view, for
instance. :)

And what about this silly indentation and dynamic typing?? We need
{ and } and type declarations everywhere! Besides, what's up with this
case sensitivity business?

This-summary-of-the-community-last-months-brought-to-you-by

Martijn

PS: oops! that should've been '-ly', not '-by'!
-- 
History of the 20th Century: WW1, WW2, WW3?
No, WWW -- Could we be going in the right direction?