<div dir="ltr"><div><span class="gmail-"><div style="font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial"><br></div></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">Hmm,
 I don't think it is should be our (CPython) responsibility to keep 
track and maintain the list of the core devs of alternate Python 
implementations. Don't they have their own community / website? They 
have their own repo, bug tracker, governance model, and everything, 
right?</div></blockquote></div><div><br></div><div>Core developers of Python implementations under PSF ownership were traditionally listed in committers.txt and developer log.</div><div>This includes at least PyPy, Jython and IronPython. If you want to propose to change this, that should be a distinct discussion</div><div>I suppose. I don't know the reason why it was originally decided to maintain this together, but I guess that the named lists are</div><div>more a PSF thing than a CPython thing.</div><div>If you intend to change this suddenly, the communities should get at least some transition time. I only know the situation of Jython,</div><div>where no committers list is available. Currently it relies on the lists named above to identify committers.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Stefan</div><div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2018-08-02 2:32 GMT+02:00 Mariatta Wijaya <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mariatta.wijaya@gmail.com" target="_blank">mariatta.wijaya@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><span class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;float:none;display:inline">I think it would also be a good idea to include core developers<br></span><span style="font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;float:none;display:inline">of other Python implementations in such a document, in<br></span><span style="font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;float:none;display:inline">separate sections, e.g. for Jython, IronPython, PyPy,<br></span><span style="font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;float:none;display:inline">Stackless, etc</span></blockquote><div style="font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial"><br></div></span><div style="font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">Hmm, I don't think it is should be our (CPython) responsibility to keep track and maintain the list of the core devs of alternate Python implementations. Don't they have their own community / website? They have their own repo, bug tracker, governance model, and everything, right?</div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div style="font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial"><br></div><div style="font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial"><div dir="ltr" class="m_996423506081765669gmail-m_-6759993633785965987gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div>Mariatta</div></div></div></div></font></span></div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 2:54 PM Eric Snow <<a href="mailto:ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com" target="_blank">ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 3:44 PM M.-A. Lemburg <<a href="mailto:mal@egenix.com" target="_blank">mal@egenix.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> On 01.08.2018 23:28, Mariatta Wijaya wrote:<br>
> > See also an open issue to revamp the Developer log:<br>
> > <a href="https://github.com/python/devguide/issues/390" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/python/<wbr>devguide/issues/390</a><br>
> ><br>
> > Someone has also said that they're working on tracking down the dormant<br>
> > core devs, but now I can't find that email.<br>
><br>
> I think the log is fine at it is, since it serves a different<br>
> purpose.<br>
><br>
> The list should be in addition to the log, not replacing it.<br>
><br>
> Resources we already have:<br>
><br>
> * <a href="https://devguide.python.org/developers/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://devguide.python.org/<wbr>developers/</a><br>
> *<br>
> <a href="https://bugs.python.org/user?%40action=search&iscommitter=1&%40pagesize=300&%40sort=username" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://bugs.python.org/user?%<wbr>40action=search&iscommitter=1&<wbr>%40pagesize=300&%40sort=<wbr>username</a><br>
> * python-committers Subscribers List (but this is currently only<br>
>   for list admins to see - perhaps we could make that available<br>
>   to list members ?!)<br>
> * <a href="https://hg.python.org/committers.txt" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://hg.python.org/<wbr>committers.txt</a><br>
> * for the early days:<br>
><br>
> <a href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/python/cpython/e42b705188271da108de42b55d9344642170aa2b/Misc/HISTORY" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://raw.githubusercontent.<wbr>com/python/cpython/<wbr>e42b705188271da108de42b55d9344<wbr>642170aa2b/Misc/HISTORY</a><br>
>   in combination with<br>
><br>
> <a href="https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/e42b705188271da108de42b55d9344642170aa2b/Misc/ACKS" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/python/<wbr>cpython/blob/<wbr>e42b705188271da108de42b55d9344<wbr>642170aa2b/Misc/ACKS</a><br>
>   (in those times, there was no direct access to the repo<br>
>   and all patches had to go through the team around Guido)<br>
<br>
There's also:<br>
<br>
* the members of the github team<br>
* folks marked as committers as BPO<br>
<br>
I don't recall if these are exposed via public lists though.<br>
<br>
-eric<br>
<br>
> I think it would also be a good idea to include core developers<br>
> of other Python implementations in such a document, in<br>
> separate sections, e.g. for Jython, IronPython, PyPy,<br>
> Stackless, etc.<br>
</blockquote></div>
</div></div><br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
python-committers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:python-committers@python.org">python-committers@python.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.python.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/python-<wbr>committers</a><br>
Code of Conduct: <a href="https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.python.org/psf/<wbr>codeofconduct/</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>