On 6/12/06, Fredrik Lundh <fredrik at pythonware.com> wrote: > > Brett Cannon wrote: > > > But I don't think this is trying to say they don't care. People just > want > > to lower the overhead of maintaining the distro. > > well, wouldn't the best way to do that be to leave all non-trivial > maintenance of a > given component to an existing external community? > > (after all, the number of non-python-dev python contributors are *much* > larger > than the number of python-dev contributors). > > I mean, we're not really talking about ordinary leak-elimination or > portability-fixing > or security-hole-plugging maintenance; it's the > let's-extend-the-api-in-incompatible- > ways and fork-because-we-can stuff that I'm worried about. Well, I don't know if that is necessarily the case. PEP 360 doesn't have a single project saying that minor fixes can just go right in. If we want to just change the wording such that all code in the tree can be touched for bug fixes and compatibility issues without clearance, that's great. But Phillip's email that sparked all of this was about basic changes to wsgiref, not some API change (at least to the best of my knowledge). -Brett -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20060612/5127f7b8/attachment.html
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