Currently, I start IDLE with:

  $ python -m idlelib.idle

It would be nice add __main__.py to simplify this to:

  $ python -m idlelib

And perhaps, more boldly rename the directory so that we get:

  $ python -m idle

This is a duplicate of issue24212.

I would also like Terry to consider renaming or aliasing idlelib to idle.  That would further simplify the startup and it is a more appropriate name given that IDLE is used as an application rather than as a library.

idlelib.__main__ was added in 3.3: Patch was d543f2b8b0b66af330aae6764e53495cda48fd4e
Author: Andrew Svetlov <andrew.svetlov@gmail.com>
Date: 3/26/2012 3:11:46 PM
Message: IDLE can be launched as python -m ildelib [misspelled]

#24212 was about backporting the addition to 2.7.  I opened it after PEP 434 clearly made this permitted.  The attempt had the problems described therein.
---

I quite agree that 'python -m idle' would be nicer than 'python -m idlelib', just as the latter is nicer than idlelib.idle or  idlelib.pyshell.  However, switching would break every text (and program) that tell people about any of the latter three. That would include many of my (and other people's) Stackoverflow comments and answers.  I am therefore neither inclined to do this, nor do I think I am allowed to by out back-compatibility policies.

My impression is that the directory name linking needed to make both work without two copies is OS specific and not something that can be done in the repository.  I don't even know how to do it properly on Windows.  I am not going to try to get all installer makers to agree to make a change.

What about adding a simple Lib/idle.py that imports and runs the main function from idlelib?

Hi Éric.  Adding idle.py would make -m idle work.  But I believe it would violate existing policy.  So I will not propose it on python-ideas or pydev and hope no one else does either.

PEP 434, at least in part, formalized what I believe was older practice with respect to idlelib.  I was surprised by the negative reaction that ensued and do not want a repeat.

Raymond, I have considered this at length and see no prospect for a positive change at this time.

This issue reminded me to open #31329, to index 'idlelib' and better document the options for starting IDLE..