On Sat, Jul 08, 2000 at 05:42:11PM -0400, Gordon McMillan wrote: > There are at least 3 and maybe 6 or more of us who still read > c.l.py (though I've dropped back to newsgroup so I can skip > the braindead threads). As a partial solution, perhaps we > could use some self-discipline and sometimes say "kick it to > c.l.py". I, for one, would be willing to _help_ (not "assume > responsibility for"!) monitoring threads of this sort and > summarizing back to the dev list. Agreed, though I think it should go the other way, too. And it isn't just about discussing new features or bugs; people, or at least involved people, like to see that there are actually people working on improving Python ;) Whether it's a new feature, a bugfix, a radical or a subtle change, whether it leads to anything or not, they like to see Python isn't dead ;) The deminishing number of 'core developers' posting in c.l.py was one of the reasons I started reading the python-dev archives, anyway. The problem with making python-dev more accessible is that it makes python-dev more accessible, as well ;-P As Guido said, he hardly gets any non-python-dev responses to python-dev postings, and that's pretty understandable. The step from reading something in the web-based archives and replying to them is pretty large. It isn't impossible (I've responded to something I saw in the archives a few times, though not directly to Go--ehr, Guido ;) but it definately helps lessen the responses. Anyway, I try to keep up with python-list and python-dev both, so I'll help with occasionally gatewaying things ;) -- Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
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