[Python-Dev] Docs of weak stdlib modules should encourage exploration of 3rd-party alternatives
Guido van Rossum
guido at python.org
Tue Mar 13 22:16:40 CET 2012
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Tue Mar 13 22:16:40 CET 2012
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Docs of weak stdlib modules should encourage exploration of 3rd-party alternatives
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Docs of weak stdlib modules should encourage exploration of 3rd-party alternatives
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu> wrote: > Authors of separately maintained packages are, from our viewpoint, as > eligible to help with tracker issues as anyone else, even while they > continue work on their external package. Some of them are more likely than > most contributors to have the knowledge needed for some particular issues. This is a good idea. I was chatting w. Senthil this morning about adding improvements to urllib/request.py based upon ideas from urllib3, requests, httplib2 (?), and we came to the conclusion that it might be a good idea to let those packages' authors review the proposed stdlib improvements. -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Docs of weak stdlib modules should encourage exploration of 3rd-party alternatives
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Docs of weak stdlib modules should encourage exploration of 3rd-party alternatives
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list