November 12th, 2009 § § permalink
There is a Poll running on the front of the PyPI page — you have to log in to see it/vote. This poll is asking a question about the new feature(s) of allowing users to comment/5-star-rate a given package in the index.
Some of the Pros/Cons have already been added to the python wiki here, as well as this bug report here. The catalog-sig has some of the discussion as well.
This poll was created in part by this Python-Dev thread. I obviously make my opinion known.
Given my vehemence in the python-dev thread; I’d like to point out I am not against giving package consumers a voice — however, I do not think that as-implemented, these features serve anyone.
As developers of, moderators and community members on any number of social news and voting sites will point out to you — getting the system right takes a lot of time, and planning. Why not borrow pages from their play books?
You also can’t give the users a voice at the cost of the package maintainers — a balance has to be made. You have to protect and moderate out astroturfers, spammers, coordinated attacks against a given package, etc. It’s hard to get right, but easy to get wrong.
With regards to the rating system, Zed Shaw recently had an interesting piece on the bimodality of 1–5 rating systems. Comments on that here and here.
In any case; Martin put the poll up as he wants to get people’s opinions via the votes on this issue. Please take a moment to do so.
If you have suggestions on the actual implementation of a full-blown system for dealing with this, please drop an email to the catalog-sig mailing list.
There is a Poll running on the front of the PyPI page - you have to log in to see it/vote. This poll is asking a question about the new feature(s) of allowing users to comment/5-star-rate a given package in the index.
Some of the Pros/Cons have already been added to the python wiki here, ...
November 9th, 2009 § § permalink
PEP 3003: “Python Language Moratorium” has been accepted. After several weeks of discussion, Guido switched the bit this morning.
This PEP effectively freezes the syntax and following items:
- New built-ins
- General language semantics
- New __future__ imports
This does not apply to the standard library; adding methods to builtins, or bug fixes to existing things.
I know there’s opinions on both sides, but I see this as a Good Thing™ — this hopefully frees up core-dev to work on the standard library, tests, the interpreter, docs, etc — basically everything “else” that makes Python, well — Python.
This quiescence will also allow other implmentations to catch up to the current syntax, builtins, etc. This is a good thing for everyone as Python the language is no longer “Python the C interpreter” — it’s Python the Language as interpreted by unladen-swallow|jython|pypy|ironpython.
There’s also the point that in the last 5 or 6 years, Python as a language has added a pile of new syntax and features that still haven’t seen wide spread use. For example, context managers. Operating System vendors lag behind us in terms of releases. We need to see these things used in the wild to see if the various experiments work.
Yes; this slows the development of the language down, but given most of the known world is still on 2.4/2.5 — does it really fundamentally effect anyone other than outliers (early adopters) and core-developers?
We’ll see how the experiment goes.
PEP 3003: "Python Language Moratorium" has been accepted. After several weeks of discussion, Guido switched the bit this morning.
This PEP effectively freezes the syntax and following items:
New built-ins
General language semantics
New __future__ imports
This does not apply to the standard library; adding methods to builtins, or bug fixes to existing things.
I know there's opinions on both ...
November 4th, 2009 § § permalink