Skip to content

PEP 594 Removing dead batteries from stdlib #86777

Closed as not planned
Closed as not planned
PEP 594 Removing dead batteries from stdlib#86777
Labels
3.13only security fixesstdlibStandard Library Python modules in the Lib/ directorytype-featureA feature request or enhancement

Description

@aeros
aeros
opened on Dec 10, 2020
BPO 42611
Nosy @terryjreedy, @tiran, @jkloth, @isidentical, @aeros
PRs
  • bpo-42611: PEP 594 - Remove asyncore, asynchat, and smptd from stdlib #23728
    		•

    Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.

    Show more details

    GitHub fields:

    assignee = None
closed_at = None
created_at = <Date 2020-12-10.04:51:12.046>
labels = ['type-feature', 'library', '3.10']
title = 'PEP 594 Removing dead batteries from stdlib'
updated_at = <Date 2020-12-12.01:54:23.481>
user = 'https://github.com/aeros'

    bugs.python.org fields:

    activity = <Date 2020-12-12.01:54:23.481>
actor = 'terry.reedy'
assignee = 'none'
closed = False
closed_date = None
closer = None
components = ['Library (Lib)']
creation = <Date 2020-12-10.04:51:12.046>
creator = 'aeros'
dependencies = []
files = []
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 42611
keywords = []
message_count = 2.0
messages = ['382815', '382898']
nosy_count = 5.0
nosy_names = ['terry.reedy', 'christian.heimes', 'jkloth', 'BTaskaya', 'aeros']
pr_nums = ['23728']
priority = 'normal'
resolution = None
stage = None
status = 'open'
superseder = None
type = 'enhancement'
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue42611'
versions = ['Python 3.10']

    Activity

    1. aeros commented on Dec 10, 2020

      @aeros
      aeros
      on Dec 10, 2020
      ContributorAuthor

      This issue was created for the purpose of tracking any changes related to PEP-594 (Removing dead batteries from stdlib), and any relevant discussions about the modules being removed.

    2. aeros
      added
      3.10 (EOL)end of life
      stdlibStandard Library Python modules in the Lib/ directory
      type-featureA feature request or enhancement
      on Dec 10, 2020

    3. terryjreedy commented on Dec 12, 2020

      @terryjreedy
      terryjreedy
      on Dec 12, 2020
      Member

      Until a pep is approved, discussion of its ideas belong elsewhere; an issue is only needed for a proposed implementation Is PR 23728 purely for discussion leading to possible approval of the PEP, or for merging regardless of the PEP fate?

    4. terryjreedy
      changed the title [-]PEP 594[/-] [+]PEP 594 Removing dead batteries from stdlib[/+] on Dec 12, 2020
    5. terryjreedy
      changed the title [-]PEP 594[/-] [+]PEP 594 Removing dead batteries from stdlib[/+] on Dec 12, 2020
    6. ezio-melotti
      transferred this issue fromon Apr 10, 2022

    7. arhadthedev commented on May 12, 2023

      @arhadthedev
      arhadthedev
      on May 12, 2023
      Member

      Repurposing this issue for 3.13.

    8. arhadthedev
      added
      3.13only security fixes
      and removed
      3.10 (EOL)end of life
      on May 12, 2023

    9. hugovk commented on May 21, 2023

      @hugovk
      hugovk
      on May 21, 2023
      Member

      I've made a start on removing the more straightforward ones in a branch.

      Would it be better with all in one PR, as one PR per module, or somewhere in the middle with smaller batches?

    10. arhadthedev commented on May 21, 2023

      @arhadthedev
      arhadthedev
      on May 21, 2023
      Member

      I would vote for the one PR per module option. It allows reviewers to not get lost with each removed module having:

      • Python code
      • tests
      • documentation
      • probably a C module
        • associated automake/Makefile and Visual Studio rules
        • also we need to check for _Py* functions added exclusively for the module and used nowhere else.

    11. arhadthedev commented on May 23, 2023

      @arhadthedev
      arhadthedev
      on May 23, 2023
      Member

      Closing in favor of gh-104773.

    12. arhadthedev
      closed this as completedon May 23, 2023

    13. CAM-Gerlach commented on May 23, 2023

      @CAM-Gerlach
      CAM-Gerlach
      on May 23, 2023
      Member

      Re-closing with the correct close state.

    14. CAM-Gerlach
      closed this as not plannedon May 23, 2023
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

    Metadata

    Metadata

    Assignees

    No one assigned

      Labels

      3.13only security fixesstdlibStandard Library Python modules in the Lib/ directorytype-featureA feature request or enhancement

      Projects

      No projects

        Milestone

        No milestone

        Relationships

        None yet

        Development

        No branches or pull requests

        Issue actions