(I accidentally mailed this only to Greg; here's a repost of the relevant parts to the list:) [me] > > Good questions. I have to say that I feel reluctant to release any > > kind of control -- yet at the same time I desperately need help > > getting trivial stuff checked in. [Greg Stein] > Reading your comments below, we may be able to help. [...Proposal of lieutenants condensed...] > Based on my responses, I would venture to state that a group of LTs would > manage to keep the Python core rock solid, except for: > > 1) subtle breakages that require your broader knowledge of Python > 2) changes that "go against the plan" (and the LTs were ignorant of it) > 3) minor format issues > > You would still review checkins, but the number of reviews would drop > since the (obvious) crap has been eliminated. #1 is based on your *broad* > knowledge of Python; I presume the LTs would be your match on various > subsets of Python. By keeping the LTs well-informed, #2 could be nearly > eliminated. #3 isn't that big of a deal, as I think your desired style is > relatively well-known and the LTs would simply endeavor to match existing > style. > > You could avoid a lot of testing; you would probably be inclined to do > testing of items that you find dubious, but still this would be a > reduction. > > ===== > > That may be an answer to the checkin problem. How about actual snapshots, > alphas, betas, releases, and accompanying notes/news/readme files? I > presume your LTs could run the alpha and beta aspects, but you would still > issue final releases. There's a lot of work in these (you may have noticed that the release notes got sloppier as 1.5.2 neared its completion). I would be happy to have the responsibility to decide to release without the burden of having to do all the work. > Does your mail volume need to be reduced? (I think this has been asked > before) Specifically, would patches@python.org (and similar targets) need > to be established? (I would think so, as a matter of course, with the > expectation that some patches would still end up with you and need to be > bounced to patches@) It's not the mail volume that bothers me -- I can ignore 100s of messages a day very quickly. It's the time it takes to respond to all of them. As an experiment, I've collected about 40 messages with suggested patches in them that I found in my inbox; the oldest are nearly two years old. You can access these from this address: http://www.python.org/~guido/patch/ I would love any help I could get in responding with these, and taking action in the form of patches. I propose that if you decide that a particular patch is worth checking in, you ask the author for the bugrelease or wetsign disclaimer and let me know that I can check it in; if changes to the patch are needed, I propose that you negotiate these with the author first. (I often ask them to test my version of a patch when I have style suggestions but don't have access the target platform or problem it solves.) --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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