I think I agree with Mark's post, although I do see a little more light (the relative imports dicussion resulted in working code, for instance). The benevolent lieutenant idea may work, _if_ the lieutenants can be found. I myself will quickly join Mark in wishing the new python-dev well and abandoning ship (half a :-). If that doesn't work maybe we should try at the very least to create a "memory". If you bring up a subject for discussion and you don't have working code that's fine the first time. But if anyone brings it up a second time they're supposed to have code. That way at least we won't be rehashing old discussions (as happend on the python-list every time, with subjects like GC or optimizations). And maybe we should limit ourselves in our replies: don't speak up too much in discussions if you're not going to write code. I know that I'm pretty good at answering with my brilliant insights to everything myself:-). It could well be that refining and refining the design (as in the getopt discussion) results in such a mess of opinions that no-one has the guts to write the code anymore. -- Jack Jansen | ++++ stop the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal ++++ Jack.Jansen@oratrix.com | ++++ if you agree copy these lines to your sig ++++ www.oratrix.nl/~jack | see http://www.xs4all.nl/~tank/spg-l/sigaction.htm
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4