[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python
- From: Lorenzo Donati <lorenzodonatibz@...>
- Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2020 13:28:57 +0100
On 03/02/2020 03:02, Andrew Starks wrote:
On Feb 2, 2020, at 04:43, Lorenzo Donati
The "we have no standard library" issue is not a technical problem
in the first place, but a management and (partly) a social one,
What if an organization, such as the Linux Foundation, would agree to
host such an organization? Perhaps they would agree to help With
marketing, trade shows, other exposure, provide a governance
Assuming they would do it with the blessings of PUC/Rio, do you think
something like that would help?
It's not a bad idea, in principle. I see just some practical obstacles:
1. As you point out, would Lua team endorse such an effort? I strongly
believe that with no such endorsement any initiative is doomed to fail.
That's a big prerequisite.
2. It should take care also of the Windows "part" of the job, which is
not obvious it would happen. And I think Lua shouldn't become a
"*NIX"-only thing, also because most non professional devs are probably
Windows users (and that's a big market share).
Would the Linux foundation care to support Windows in a neutral and
on-par way, without trying to win users for Linux or biasing its efforts
toward Linux Lua distros?
3. Still we would need guidance and policies to define guidelines for
the whole library. Just start coding and trying to come up with an API
wouldn't work, IMO. We already have some libraries. We should strive for
a consensus about:
A. What common problems the /standard/ library should tackle.
B. What the structure of "The Library" should be (modules naming
conventions, namespacing, disk layout, how to cope with new modules,
etc.). How a single module should be organized to support
C. What "look and feel" should "The Libray" have? what style the APIs
(plural!) should have (having a uniform API style across modules helps a
lot in usability and documentation)? What error reporting style would it
use? Are debugging facility for the library be consistent across
modules? Should we have a "framework" for error reporting/unit testing/
debugging (also usable by client code), or do we need to use a simpler
set of very basic facilities (small modules, no framework-like) that
every module writer should use to integrate it in the library.
D. How would a module be accepted in the library; how to accomodate
developers with few time to spend on maintenance (copyright should be
transferred to the "foundation"? The "foundation" should allocate dev
resources?). Maybe some devs wants to contribute with few hours a month,
are there modules where many devs can work only for limited time? Maybe
use their time to build unit tests?
Someone has to decide all this.
I repeat "LOT of policy" if we want to avoid past mistakes and really
want to build a solid, stable, backward/forward compatible and
future-proof code base, to which big and small contributions can be
integrated in a harmonic way. More so, if we want the library to be more
Lua-like than Python-like.
A good "Standard Library" is not (should not?) be just an enormous
collection of sticked together code.
I'm not saying it's easy, on the contrary, we failed many times because
it is not easy at all. Good management is all but easy (and few
developers, in my experience, are also good managers)!
Disclaimer: I'm not at all a manager type (/defintely/ not), but I can
recognize a good manager when I get to know one.