[Python-Dev] Docs of weak stdlib modules should encourage exploration of 3rd-party alternatives (original) (raw)

Thomas Wouters thomas at python.org
Tue Mar 13 20:50:09 CET 2012

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 12:38, Brian Curtin <brian at python.org> wrote:

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 14:13, Kenneth Reitz <me at kennethreitz.com> wrote: > I think the cheesehop trove classifiers would be the ideal way to > agnostically link to a page of packages related to the standard package in > question. No need for sort order.

Randomize the order for all I care. We still need to ensure we're suggesting quality projects. It doesn't make sense for us to suggest alternatives that we wouldn't want to use ourselves by just polling some list that anyone can get on. This is documentation that receives hundreds of thousands of views a month*. We need to be picky about what goes in it. > The beauty of this solution is that packages that aren't maintained won't > add the appropriate classifier to their package, and therefore not show up > in the list. Just because it's maintained doesn't mean it's not garbage. I think we really need to start every project off with a 0 and make them prove that they're a 10. Just being active means nothing.

* http://www.python.org/webstats/usage201202.html#TOPURLS - I don't know what page "Documentation" means since it doesn't have a specific link, but whatever page that is got hit 960K times in February.

GroupURL /doc/* Documentation

So it's anything that's in www.python.org/doc/. I don't believe it counts doc.python.org and docs.python.org.

-- Thomas Wouters <thomas at python.org>

Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20120313/1b1fdfa0/attachment.html>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list