On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 12:38:31 -0400, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: > On Sep 17, 2013, at 12:25 PM, "R. David Murray" <rdmur...@bitdance.com> wrote: > > I don't think this PEP changes the inclusion calculus, because I don't > > think we've given any real weight to that in stdlib inclusion decisions. > > I think the decision making is already focused on why Python should have > > a particular tool out of the box. > > When I originally wrote this statement I wasn't trying to say that modules > were included because of the lack of an easy installer, but instead that > a not insignificant number of people had wanted to include stuff and some > of their reasoning that I had seen in the past included the difficulty in > bootstrapping the installer. > > So it decreases the *pressure* from others to include stuff for connivence > not that it necessarily changes how python-dev itself weighs the decision > to do so (but it might for some people?).
I see. Yes, that makes sense. --David _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
