This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author gvanrossum
Recipients Catherine.Devlin, barry, docs@python, gvanrossum, lukasz.langa, ned.deily, rhettinger, steven.daprano
Date 2018-04-07.02:17:57
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1523067478.01.0.682650639539.issue33233@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Well, is cmd2 stabilizing, or is it still changing at a rate too fast for inclusion in the stdlib? Does it perhaps have a mix of desirable and wacky features? Or could we just copy much of it into the stdlib as 'cmd'?

I'm a bit concerned about the idea that we should not upgrade stdlib modules because a better 3rd party alternative exists -- and I'm kind of assuming that those 3rd party module authors are also somewhat disappointed that their modules are not used to improve the stdlib. (PyPI not withstanding.)

Often (like in this case) there's just no chance of getting rid of the stdlib module, so we're just stuck with a duplication of functionality.

Note that every case is a bit different. But I'm not ready to give up on the idea that Python comes with batteries included. We should not let those batteries corrode and leak.
History
Date User Action Args
2018-04-07 02:17:58gvanrossumsetrecipients: + gvanrossum, barry, rhettinger, ned.deily, steven.daprano, docs@python, lukasz.langa, Catherine.Devlin
2018-04-07 02:17:58gvanrossumsetmessageid: <1523067478.01.0.682650639539.issue33233@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2018-04-07 02:17:57gvanrossumlinkissue33233 messages
2018-04-07 02:17:57gvanrossumcreate