continuing conversation from UDS-N - Application Review Board

[Barry Warsaw]

On Nov 15, 2010, at 12:06 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote:

>Why not just use python-support/dh_python2's private-module mode? This
>is what most applications should be using, anyway, rather than polluting
>the public Python module namespace.

I hesitate to mention this here because I agree that in this context,
application-private modules makes good sense.

In *general* though, I'm not a big fan of it because properly organized and
named packages should not be "polluting" but enhancing the public namespace.
A good way to think about it is that an "application" (i.e. the command you
execute) is just the tip of the iceberg on top of a rich library that could be
useful to others.  I'm thinking about examples like 'bzr' and 'bzrlib' which
were explicitly designed to work that way, to great benefit.

-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20101115/687a38d1/attachment.pgp