Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

bpo-37480: add ptpython to alternate interpreters #14538

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

@zachvalenta
Copy link

commented Jul 2, 2019

Despite personally using bpython, ptpython seems both mature and popular enough to merit inclusion in the docs. Plus, bpython recommends them :)

https://bugs.python.org/issue37480

add ptpython to list of alternate interpreters
Despite personally using bpython, ptpython seems both mature and popular enough to merit inclusion in the docs. Plus, bpython recommends them :)
@the-knights-who-say-ni

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jul 2, 2019

Hello, and thanks for your contribution!

I'm a bot set up to make sure that the project can legally accept your contribution by verifying you have signed the PSF contributor agreement (CLA).

Our records indicate we have not received your CLA. For legal reasons we need you to sign this before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue.

If you have recently signed the CLA, please wait at least one business day
before our records are updated.

You can check yourself to see if the CLA has been received.

Thanks again for your contribution, we look forward to reviewing it!

@zachvalenta

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

commented Jul 5, 2019

Unsure if this PR would qualify for the skip news label; checked out some other recent PRs (like 14538) and couldn't tell how that call was made. Just let me know and I'll be happy to add.

@aeros167
Copy link
Member

left a comment

@zachvalenta Thanks for the contribution! To answer your question, I'd say this doc change could warrant a skip news, as the section itself still provides the same purpose (describing alternative interpreters). A brief news blurb wouldn't hurt though, such as "Added ptpython to list of alternative interpreters".

As to whether or not ptpython should actually be added to this section, I'm not certain that the docs are the appropriate place for maintaining a list of alternative interpreters. From my understanding, this section was not meant to provide a list of all up to date alternatives. Instead, it seems to just be there to provide a couple of examples. My concern is that if we add this to the docs, there will be an argument to continually add and remove others, which further adds to documentation maintenance costs. As @terryjreedy had suggested on the bug tracker page, maintaining a list of interpreters seems better suited to the wiki (which is much easier to periodically edit).

For the most part, worthwhile maintenance costs on the docs primarily revolve around the version of the Python language itself. However, I do think that it might be appropriate to link to the wiki page itself in the docs, so that users can easily find a list of current interpreters. You can find that here: https://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonEditors#Enhanced_Python_shells. Feel free to add ptpython to the list on there.

Depending on what the others think, it might be worthwhile to also refactor the paragraph of alternative interpreters to remove any specific mention of individuals ones in the docs, with the only direct link being to the python wiki page section. Something like this might be appropriate:

For a maintained list of enhanced interactive environments, visit the python wiki:
https://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonEditors#Enhanced_Python_shells

This would likely be the most fair to all of the alternative options, so it does not appear that the docs favor any of them in particular. The docs really should not be the place to mention specific alternative applications when we have a wiki.

@zachvalenta

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

commented Jul 10, 2019

@aeros167 I agree with all this. The wiki is a more natural home for that info, and might as well move the bpython reference over there while we're at it. I'll update my PR and make an edit to the wiki to add as well. Harried at work this week so will get to it this weekend!

@matrixise

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Sep 13, 2019

As indicated in the comments, the right place for this info is the wiki. Thank you again for your proposal.

@matrixise matrixise closed this Sep 13, 2019

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.