[SciPy-User] Pylab - standard packages
Fri Sep 21 12:36:26 CDT 2012
On 21 September 2012 18:15, Skipper Seabold <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> This sounds great. A few others I usually put in a fresh install.
I don't know about mpmath. I probably wouldn't include Sphinx in the
spec, as it's important more when you're developing and releasing
packages. But it does return us to the question about general-purpose
Python packages. Should we require distribute, for example - or just
specify that there must be a package installation mechanism? What
about popular tools like requests? Or things like GUI toolkits that
are difficult to install separately? Although PyQt would rather
increase the minimum size.
> I also like the idea of having (configurable) default imports (**with
I wondered when this question would come up. ;-) One of the pieces of
baggage the Pylab name comes with is a the relatively flat namespace
of the pylab module. I think we need to leave that reasonably intact,
just to avoid annoying all the people who're familiar with it. We
could define something like a pylab2 module, and encourage people to
use that. But I suggest the namespaces vs. flat debate is something we
postpone to a later discussion.
More information about the SciPy-User