Re: Pillow, the "friendly" PIL fork

On 8/1/10 6:51 AM, in article
[email protected], "Fredrik
Lundh" <[email protected]> wrote:

> 2010/8/1 Jerome Leclanche <[email protected]>:
> 
>> Although the "PIL" and "Image*" packages themselves do not
>> respect python standards (should be from imaging import .., or
>> something alike).
> 
> If you had been paying attention, you'd noticed that "python
> standards" change all the time, depend on what the latest minibosses
> think (suggestion: look up old versions of PEP 8 before you post stuff
> about how others ignore the "standards").

This is good to know, thank you! (And, thank you Jerome and Daniel for your
feedback).

So if I understand you correctly, Fredrik, you are saying that you are
adhering to what was once a standard and that you are skeptical about new
standards (which is certainly reasonable).

Regardless of standards, if I understand things correctly, some code
supports:

 import Image

While other code requires:

 from PIL import Image

To work properly.

So, we have a "human" problem. If everyone could agree on a single format
and to update all their code we could move forward (also a logistical
problem).



Alex




> 
> </F>
> _______________________________________________
> Image-SIG maillist  -  [email protected]
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/image-sig
> 

-- 
Alex Clark · http://aclark.net
Author ‹ Plone 3.3 Site Administration · http://aclark.net/admin



_______________________________________________
Image-SIG maillist  -  [email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/image-sig