>> I wasn't thinking about it quite like that. I was thinking more
>> along the lines of a subset of people would volunteer to do the
>> triage, passing it off between themselves at the rotation boundaries.
>> That's more-or-less how Cameron Laird does it for the weekly Python
>> URL stuff.
Guido> Maybe you'd like to help organize this?
Martin thinks it's unnecessary. I suspect he pays as much attention to
incoming bugs as anyone, so let's pass on this for the time being.
Instead...
>> I suggest you post an announcement to c.l.py. I don't know where
>> best to have them reply. Sending mail to guido@python.org would
>> clearly not be the right place. Python-dev wouldn't normally be the
>> right place for this either, but that's where all the people
>> qualified to do the reference checks hang out.
Guido> I'd like to delegate this. Maybe you can send out an
Guido> announcement and read through the applications, forwarding only
Guido> the ones that look good to me. You may have to think a bit about
Guido> what to write in the announcement, but please do it without
Guido> asking me -- I need to delegate more!
I can do this. I'll send a note to c.l.py soliciting requests to be added
to the developers list. How about one more level of indirection. I will
prioritize the responses then forward them to anyone on this list who's
interested in participating in the review process. Those people can then
pass along the usual +1/0/-1 (to me or Guido) with or without further
explanation, as they see fit.
I'll try to get a post out this morning. We can decide how to handle the
details of the review process in parallel with the responses arriving.
Skip
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