Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> I guess the patch collection isn't just about patches -- it's about
> the general level of effort that some patches require. I just don't
> feel comfortable with saying "no" without a good reason, and "no time"
> isn't a good enough reason. So I welcome any form of comments on
> these patch proposals.
Understood.
>
> Or is there a better idea? Should I forward all patches I get to
> python-dev?
Certainly not. This isn't the purpose of the list, except maybe if a
patch is too fundamental to be just a patch. :-)
> To a separate list?
This would be fine. A public list discussing all submitted patches
would be helpful. There are some patches that require routine testing
that few people here would find the time to perform. Others require
"critical mass" of opinions to be adopted, rejected or deferred.
Maybe we could set the gross operation mode of such a list as follows:
You publish systematically all patches (except those that get checked
in directly)
The discussion focuses patches submitted during the past month.
Some of them are accepted, some are rejected, many are "deferred"
(for various reasons).
Deferred patches are those that have an undecided future and get
archived. In this case, a mail notification is sent to the author
explaining the situation. If the author thinks the patch is worthy
and "decidable", s/he has to resubmit the patch for reviving the
discussion on the list and for trying to gain more proponents/favorable
opinions. (because the list is discussing 1 month old patches only).
If the author pushes real hard, either a decision would be taken, either
s/he will end up convinced that the patch is "undecidable" for the time
being :-). Besides, all serious patchers would become members of this list,
which isn't so bad (given that presently, you're the only contact person
for patch related material/submissions and you're mainly discussing a
subset of the submissions, one-by-one, with the authors in person).
This operation mode would ensure that the "light" patches, mostly
the various bug fixes, will end up with a decision. The "hard" ones,
those that introduce new functionality or behavior, will be seriously
discussed and will eventually end up deferred (and archived) for future
consideration. Thus, the archive would constitute yet another "memory" of
the development process, accessible to all interested parties.
This forum, like python-dev, would have a consultative mission,
preserving your decision rights, so it's something you'd probably
want to try (provided that you fix the rules of the game at its creation).
--
Vladimir MARANGOZOV | Vladimir.Marangozov@inrialpes.fr
http://sirac.inrialpes.fr/~marangoz | tel:(+33-4)76615277 fax:76615252
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