David Ascher wrote:
> Is this going to be just modules, or anything? If it's anything, then
> there should be a type: module or type: documentation or type: whatever,
> and if they're all going to be modules then the documentation for each
> module need not say it's a module. =)

Hmm... that's a novel idea. Offhand I would think that the
only things listed would be software; documentation is less common,
and is already being handled adequately by mechanisms like the
Documentation page on www.python.org . There aren't new pieces of
documentation coming into existence every day, so it's not terribly
difficult to track them.

On the other hand, a lot of people are writing code and making
it available, so pieces of code have to be tracked, and tracked
without devoting very much of a maintainer's time.

However, not everything is a module. NumPy isn't a module,
though it contains several modules. I'd like to have an 'Included-In'
attribute, so that NumPy would be listed, and so would all the modules
that NumPy provides, which would be listed as components. Consider
someone looking for code to read a Unix mailbox; they might not think
to check the standard distribution, but they could do a locator
search, and find a mailbox.py entry which read 'Included-In: Python
1.4'. (Yes, I know it would be a lot of work to generate all the
entries for the standard library; burn that bridge when we come to
it...)


Andrew Kuchling
amk@...
http://people.magnet.com/%7Eamk/

_______________
LOCATOR-SIG: Discussions about a Python Locator for resource discovery

send messages to: locator-sig@...
administrivia to: locator-sig-request@...
_______________