4 ms·

WebOb uses cgi for parsing multipart uploads/forms... It's not obsolete, and it is heavily used, it's working software that works well. Ripping it out just mea

WebOb uses cgi for parsing multipart uploads/forms... It's not obsolete, and it is heavily used, it's working software that works well. Ripping it out just means now there will be N copies floating around that will all need to get patched/fixed instead of just a single version included with Python.

qbasic_forever 5y ago
Well apparently it's not heavily enough used that any of its current users were motivated enough to discuss the PEP and make a strong case for keeping it in the standard library. The discussion was open for _three years_ and had hundreds of comments: https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-594-removing-dead-batteries-from-the-standard-library/1704 https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-594-removing-dead-batteries... The outcome is that there isn't enough usage to merit this being in the standard library.
- nitrogen 5y ago
  I suspect there's very little overlap between users of development software and participants in the bureaucracy that designs the software. The requisite personality types are very different.
  - qbasic_forever 5y ago
    If you're developing software that depends on a python standard library it is on you to subscribe to the relevant mailing lists so you can be notified of security issues, deprecations, changes, etc. There is not bureaucracy here to be aware of what's happening, or even comment on the changes.
    - hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
      Years ago I used to do that. But nowadays I use so much external stuff it's impossible. So I'm actually immensely grateful to the Python team for including so much in the Standard Library and maintaining it for decades - because for me, at least until now, it's been that one part where I could relax a bit about and be confident that competent people will take care of everything and I won't need to spend much time analyzing the situation.
      - odonnellryan 5y ago
        Seems to me that this is exactly the problem. The python team is saying they really can't maintain these libraries to a high standard and need to remove them from the standard library. I can see both sides but really that makes a lot of sense to me.
- X-Istence 5y ago
  https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-594-removing-dead-batteries-from-the-standard-library/1704/7 https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-594-removing-dead-batteries... Is my comment. It's the 6th comment down. Clearly I didn't make a strong enough case, but I certainly did advocate for it and mention that it is in use.

qbasic_forever 5y ago

Well apparently it's not heavily enough used that any of its current users were motivated enough to discuss the PEP and make a strong case for keeping it in the standard library. The discussion was open for _three years_ and had hundreds of comments: https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-594-removing-dead-batteries-from-the-standard-library/1704 https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-594-removing-dead-batteries... The outcome is that there isn't enough usage to merit this being in the standard library.

nitrogen 5y ago
I suspect there's very little overlap between users of development software and participants in the bureaucracy that designs the software. The requisite personality types are very different.
- qbasic_forever 5y ago
  If you're developing software that depends on a python standard library it is on you to subscribe to the relevant mailing lists so you can be notified of security issues, deprecations, changes, etc. There is not bureaucracy here to be aware of what's happening, or even comment on the changes.
  - hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
    Years ago I used to do that. But nowadays I use so much external stuff it's impossible. So I'm actually immensely grateful to the Python team for including so much in the Standard Library and maintaining it for decades - because for me, at least until now, it's been that one part where I could relax a bit about and be confident that competent people will take care of everything and I won't need to spend much time analyzing the situation.
    - odonnellryan 5y ago
      Seems to me that this is exactly the problem. The python team is saying they really can't maintain these libraries to a high standard and need to remove them from the standard library. I can see both sides but really that makes a lot of sense to me.
X-Istence 5y ago
https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-594-removing-dead-batteries-from-the-standard-library/1704/7 https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-594-removing-dead-batteries... Is my comment. It's the 6th comment down. Clearly I didn't make a strong enough case, but I certainly did advocate for it and mention that it is in use.