Message78984
I am a contributor to netaddr, having deprecated my own old and crufty
IP address library in its favor. JP's comments on the library in this
ticket are included in the set of reasons that I initially chose it to
replace my own.
When I first looked at the ipaddr code a month ago, the features I was
delighted to see in the ipaddr project include address exclusion and
address collapsing (we'd been discussing these features in netaddr since
my old project had similar functionality).
Perhaps the following might be a prudent course:
* determine how small or big a standard library ip address module or
subpackage should be;
* have a mutual discussion on the netaddr and ipaddr mail lists to
determine what would need to be changed in each project in order to
support inclusion in the standard lib;
* choose the option that requires the least code changes (simple naming
convention changes should probably be given less weight than any changes
to logic).
As for shutting down any project that is chosen, does such an action not
leave older Python versions out in the cold? Shouldn't the project
remain open to support Python versions < 2.7, with a highly visible note
that the code is included in 2.7/3.1+? (I am completely ignorant of
related Python development policy.) |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2009-01-03 18:03:23 | oubiwann | set | recipients:
+ oubiwann, gvanrossum, loewis, exarkun, giampaolo.rodola, benjamin.peterson, mattsmart, shields, pmoody, drkjam |
2009-01-03 18:03:23 | oubiwann | set | messageid: <1231005803.66.0.454539375867.issue3959@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2009-01-03 18:03:23 | oubiwann | link | issue3959 messages |
2009-01-03 18:03:21 | oubiwann | create | |
|