Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!194.134.4.91.MISMATCH!news2.euro.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.002 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'languages.': 0.04; 'subject:Open': 0.05; '"the': 0.07; 'plenty': 0.07; 'twisted,': 0.07; 'measure': 0.09; 'python:': 0.09; 'subject:Source': 0.09; 'url:blog': 0.10; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.11; 'python': 0.11; 'growing,': 0.16; 'it."': 0.16; 'it."': 0.16; 'libraries.': 0.16; 'nowadays': 0.16; 'rarely': 0.16; 'received:74.125.82.46': 0.16; 'skewed': 0.16; 'stdlib.': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'looked': 0.18; 'trying': 0.19; 'seems': 0.21; 'programming': 0.22; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.22; 'install': 0.23; 'library,': 0.24; 'loved': 0.24; 'new,': 0.24; 'math': 0.24; '(or': 0.24; 'cc:2**0': 0.24; "i've": 0.25; 'developers': 0.25; 'second': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'thus': 0.29; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; 'comparison': 0.31; 'libraries': 0.31; 'mid': 0.31; 'node': 0.31; 'community': 0.33; '"the': 0.34; 'subject:the': 0.34; "i'd": 0.34; 'received:74.125.82': 0.34; 'something': 0.35; 'point.': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'really': 0.36; 'skip:& 10': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'anything': 0.39; 'expect': 0.39; 'skip:& 20': 0.39; 'received:74.125': 0.39; 'itself': 0.39; 'how': 0.40; 'even': 0.60; 'easy': 0.60; 'results.': 0.60; 'first': 0.61; 'subject:The': 0.64; 'more': 0.64; 'charset:windows-1252': 0.65; 'article': 0.77; 'batchelder': 0.84; 'divide': 0.84; 'etc,': 0.84; 'it\x92s': 0.84; 'serious': 0.97; '2013': 0.98 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=hHnGWIS8Ge0/AUZ0U9CkghdUUWv/D6FfvWZSkEqH74w=; b=N7DUT5b5WPlpFk4ZoNYCfGKuHupotZxpOol9K51wgTzdjj22AvPA/fWqna/6cXDlSO 8qE2vllccqOWo7HsydgJhk6J16FGRUf5VlyQ4v1Tt7DCVdvZ1t5iFXH2MpqblvrdCDMB oJD8KGii0FFq33GdLg2xrBBdO1mzOo1BBAd0bPQK0BSILgGHURGiFTfGa/jLwMVv131a KjxFJXT06okaah8233tcRAOAyxt1V9qwoXqMCYkHi4xUq3u1rjjkargG8IHdFMR7yhta UhksAp6Mg0galtpsFNRFXgBtI7QAeGDTW4ZFSdk7gscmM5aeLj221msz+I4eQ71Wnv7L ROOg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.176.228 with SMTP id cl4mr5425791wjc.10.1366130485448; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 09:41:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <516D7B75.1070002@nedbatchelder.com> References: <516D7B75.1070002@nedbatchelder.com> Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:41:25 +0100 Subject: Re: The node.js Community is Quietly Changing the Face of Open Source From: Sven To: Ned Batchelder Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d1dc24d829604da7d0a71 Cc: python-list X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 136 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1366130492 news.xs4all.nl 2566 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:50437 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:43681 --089e013d1dc24d829604da7d0a71 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 16 April 2013 17:25, Ned Batchelder wrote: > On 4/16/2013 12:02 PM, Rodrick Brown wrote: > > I came across this article which sums up some of the issues I have with > modern programming languages. I've never really looked at Javascript for > anything serious or Node itself but I found this article really > informational. > > "The =93Batteries included=94 philosophy of Python was definitely the ri= ght > approach during the mid 90=92s and one of the reasons that I loved Python= so > much; this was a time before modern package management, and before it was > easy to find and install community-created libraries. Nowadays though I > think it=92s counter-productive. Developers in the community rarely want= to > bother trying to compete with the standard library, so people are less > likely to try to write libraries that improve upon it." > > > > http://caines.ca/blog/programming/the-node-js-community-is-quietly-changi= ng-the-face-of-open-source/ > > > > I don't want to get into a package pissing match, but this math is just > silly: > > *python*: 29,720 packages / 22 years =3D* 1351 packages per year* > > *ruby*: 54,385 packages / 18 years =3D *3022 packages per year* > > *node.js* 26,966 packages / 4 years =3D *6742 packages per year > * > If you want to know how fast something is growing, you don't measure 22 > years and divide by 22. You look at the number of packages added in the > last year (or month). Also the assertion that people don't want to compe= te > with the stdlib seems like pure supposition. There are plenty of > well-loved packages that "compete" with the stdlib. Lxml, Requests, > Twisted, etc, and plenty of packages in the stdlib that started as outsid= e > "competition". > Even looking at the last year/month might be give skewed results. If a technology is new, there's a lot more packages that need writing than if it's been around for 22 years, thus I'd expect to see the first year or second year as a good comparison point. --=20 ./Sven --089e013d1dc24d829604da7d0a71 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 1= 6 April 2013 17:25, Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
On 4/16/2013 12:02 PM, Rodrick Brown wrote:
I came across this article which sums up some of the issues I have with modern programming languages. I've never really looked at Javascript for anything serious or Node itself but I found this article really informational.=A0

"The =93Batteries included=94 philosophy of Python was definitely th= e right approach during the mid 90=92s and one of the reasons that I loved Python so much; this was a time before modern package management, and before it was easy to find and install community-created libraries. =A0Nowadays though I think it=92s counter-productive. =A0Developers in the community rarely want to bother trying to compete with the standard library, so people are less likely to try to write libraries that improve upon it."


http://cain= es.ca/blog/programming/the-node-js-community-is-quietly-changing-the-face-o= f-open-source/



I don't want to get into a package pissing match, but this math is just silly:

python: =A029,720 packages / 22 years =3D 1351 packages per year

ruby: =A0=A0=A0=A0=A054,385 packages / 18 years =3D =A0=A0=A03022 packages per year

node.js =A026,966 packages / 4 years =3D =A0=A06742 packages per year

If you want to know how fast something is growing, you don't measur= e 22 years and divide by 22.=A0 You look at the number of packages added in the last year (or month).=A0 Also the assertion that people don'= t want to compete with the stdlib seems like pure supposition.=A0 There are plenty of well-loved packages that "compete" with the std= lib.=A0 Lxml, Requests, Twisted, etc, and plenty of packages in the stdlib that started as outside "competition".=

Even looking at the last year/month might be give skewed results.
If = a technology is new, there's a lot more packages that need writing than= if it's been around for 22 years, thus I'd expect to see the first= year or second year as a good comparison point.

--
./Sven
--089e013d1dc24d829604da7d0a71--