> In my effort to get Python 1.2 ready for release, I am trying to
> vastly improve the library manual, both by adding descriptions of new
If you saw that and wanted to help but haven't replied yet, you can
still help proofreading. An early version of the Doc subdirectory
ready for proofreading is available from ftp.cwi.nl, in pub/python,
file doc.tar.gz. For instructions, also see the file doc.readme, and
please send me mail so I can keep you informed of new developments...
Andrew Kuchling replied:
> One thought has recently occurred to me: a framework for a
> Python Local Guide. You see, I've installed a fair number of other
> modules from various places: Lance's MetalBase module (for which I'm
> now writing documentation), my crypto stuff, etc. I suspect most
> people do this, since Python extensions are so darned useful.
> However, none of this stuff is documented in the Library Reference,
> nor should it be. I'd like to propose a subdirectory called "Local/".
> In this directory, there would be a skeleton LaTeX framework and a
> Python script that combines the framework and any *.tex files in
> Local/ to produce a guide to other, site-specific extensions.
Great idea!
> Thus, when installing a new extension module, all you have to
> do is place a libgumby.tex file in Local/ and regenerate the local
> guide. This saves you from having to alter Doc/lib.tex and add more
> stuff to the Doc directory, making it easier to upgrade to a new
> version of Python. All you'd have to keep is the Local/ directory.
Am I understanding correctly that you're volunteering to write such a
script?
> Actually, maybe we should have Local/Modules, too, instead of
> putting new modules in Modules/. Or maybe this should be all be
> placed in the Extensions directory (though it seems extensions are
> larger and more elaborate than just a single extra module.)
No, extensions are meant for anything from a single small module to a
package that's larger than the core Python distribution. The only
problem is that at most sites it's *sooo* much easier to drop a new
module in Modules, add a line to Setup, and type "make" at the top
level, that most people (including myself :-) ignore the Extensions
mechanism.
Perhaps having a mechanism whereby new, "local" modules live in the
Extensions directory but are easily incorporated into the
Modules/Setup file would help?
--Guido van Rossum, CWI, Amsterdam <mailto:Guido.van.Rossum@cwi.nl>
<http://www.cwi.nl/cwi/people/Guido.van.Rossum.html>