Brett Cannon as PEP Delegate for PEP 639
Brett has volunteered as PEP delegate for PEP 639 (Improving license clarity with better package metadata). The process says: """ If their self-nomination is accepted by the other PyPA core reviewers, the lead PyPI maintainer and the default PEP-Delegate for package distribution metadata PEPs, then they will have the authority to approve (or reject) that PEP. """ It's not 100% clear to me how we get that acceptance, so I'm posting here to give anyone who wants to, a chance to object. In the absence of any specific comment in the process, I'll give it a week and then if there's no objections, assume that Brett will be PEP delegate. If anyone thinks approving PEP delegate volunteers should be handled differently, please say so. I'm just guessing as to what's reasonable here :-) Paul
Perhaps we can call a vote to make this change to the governance PEP, so in future we can do this. We just need to clarify what timeline you give to people to scream and how do you communicate on some list PEP delegate nominations? PS. I'm happy with the current nomination. On Tue, 11 Jan 2022, 22:33 Paul Moore, <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
Brett has volunteered as PEP delegate for PEP 639 (Improving license clarity with better package metadata). The process says:
""" If their self-nomination is accepted by the other PyPA core reviewers, the lead PyPI maintainer and the default PEP-Delegate for package distribution metadata PEPs, then they will have the authority to approve (or reject) that PEP. """
It's not 100% clear to me how we get that acceptance, so I'm posting here to give anyone who wants to, a chance to object. In the absence of any specific comment in the process, I'll give it a week and then if there's no objections, assume that Brett will be PEP delegate.
If anyone thinks approving PEP delegate volunteers should be handled differently, please say so. I'm just guessing as to what's reasonable here :-)
Paul _______________________________________________ PyPA-Committers mailing list -- pypa-committers@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to pypa-committers-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/pypa-committers.python.org/ Member address: gaborjbernat@gmail.com
On Tue, 2022-01-11 at 22:48 +0000, Bernat Gabor wrote:
Perhaps we can call a vote to make this change to the governance PEP, so in future we can do this. We just need to clarifywhat timeline you give to people to scream and how do you communicate on some list PEP delegate nominations?
PS. I'm happy with the current nomination.
I believe this comes from the SC, so it would not be in scope of a PyPA vote. Could be wrong though. Cheers, Filipe Laíns
On Tue, 11 Jan 2022 at 22:54, Filipe Laíns <lains@riseup.net> wrote:
I believe this comes from the SC, so it would not be in scope of a PyPA vote. Could be wrong though.
It's documented at https://www.pypa.io/en/latest/specifications/#proposing-new-specifications which is our document. The original process comes from core Python, but we documented our approach independently. I assume we had (or didn't need) the SC's approval to do that. This thread is not a formal PyPA vote, PEP 609 (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0609/#pypa-committer-votes) limits those to 4 very specific cases. I'm just asking for objections, to satisfy the requirement that a PEP delegate self-nomination "is accepted by the other PyPA core reviewers". I really don't want to make a process issue out of this. Paul
I approve. Side note I think the PyPA process predates the SC by years Sent from my phone with my typo-happy thumbs. Please excuse my brevity On Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 17:02 Paul Moore <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jan 2022 at 22:54, Filipe Laíns <lains@riseup.net> wrote:
I believe this comes from the SC, so it would not be in scope of a PyPA
vote.
Could be wrong though.
It's documented at https://www.pypa.io/en/latest/specifications/#proposing-new-specifications which is our document. The original process comes from core Python, but we documented our approach independently. I assume we had (or didn't need) the SC's approval to do that.
This thread is not a formal PyPA vote, PEP 609 (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0609/#pypa-committer-votes) limits those to 4 very specific cases. I'm just asking for objections, to satisfy the requirement that a PEP delegate self-nomination "is accepted by the other PyPA core reviewers". I really don't want to make a process issue out of this.
Paul _______________________________________________ PyPA-Committers mailing list -- pypa-committers@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to pypa-committers-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/pypa-committers.python.org/ Member address: graffatcolmingov@gmail.com
On Tue, 11 Jan 2022 at 22:48, Bernat Gabor <gaborjbernat@gmail.com> wrote:
Perhaps we can call a vote to make this change to the governance PEP, so in future we can do this. We just need to clarify what timeline you give to people to scream and how do you communicate on some list PEP delegate nominations?
Personally, I have no appetite for governance debates, and especially not for being the person who proposes them. But I'd be fine with someone else doing so - I feel that a lot of our current processes are rather under-specified and open to interpretation. Paul
I approve. -- Matthias On Tue, 11 Jan 2022 at 23:33, Paul Moore <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
Brett has volunteered as PEP delegate for PEP 639 (Improving license clarity with better package metadata). The process says:
""" If their self-nomination is accepted by the other PyPA core reviewers, the lead PyPI maintainer and the default PEP-Delegate for package distribution metadata PEPs, then they will have the authority to approve (or reject) that PEP. """
It's not 100% clear to me how we get that acceptance, so I'm posting here to give anyone who wants to, a chance to object. In the absence of any specific comment in the process, I'll give it a week and then if there's no objections, assume that Brett will be PEP delegate.
If anyone thinks approving PEP delegate volunteers should be handled differently, please say so. I'm just guessing as to what's reasonable here :-)
Paul _______________________________________________ PyPA-Committers mailing list -- pypa-committers@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to pypa-committers-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/pypa-committers.python.org/ Member address: bussonniermatthias@gmail.com
So what are the next steps with this? On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 2:32 PM Paul Moore <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
Brett has volunteered as PEP delegate for PEP 639 (Improving license clarity with better package metadata). The process says:
""" If their self-nomination is accepted by the other PyPA core reviewers, the lead PyPI maintainer and the default PEP-Delegate for package distribution metadata PEPs, then they will have the authority to approve (or reject) that PEP. """
It's not 100% clear to me how we get that acceptance, so I'm posting here to give anyone who wants to, a chance to object. In the absence of any specific comment in the process, I'll give it a week and then if there's no objections, assume that Brett will be PEP delegate.
If anyone thinks approving PEP delegate volunteers should be handled differently, please say so. I'm just guessing as to what's reasonable here :-)
Paul _______________________________________________ PyPA-Committers mailing list -- pypa-committers@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to pypa-committers-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/pypa-committers.python.org/ Member address: brett@python.org
I think no one objected and the timeline passed so the proposal has been accepted. It's all yours, as far as I understand. Bernat On Thu, 27 Jan 2022, 20:08 Brett Cannon, <brett@python.org> wrote:
So what are the next steps with this?
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 2:32 PM Paul Moore <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
Brett has volunteered as PEP delegate for PEP 639 (Improving license clarity with better package metadata). The process says:
""" If their self-nomination is accepted by the other PyPA core reviewers, the lead PyPI maintainer and the default PEP-Delegate for package distribution metadata PEPs, then they will have the authority to approve (or reject) that PEP. """
It's not 100% clear to me how we get that acceptance, so I'm posting here to give anyone who wants to, a chance to object. In the absence of any specific comment in the process, I'll give it a week and then if there's no objections, assume that Brett will be PEP delegate.
If anyone thinks approving PEP delegate volunteers should be handled differently, please say so. I'm just guessing as to what's reasonable here :-)
Paul _______________________________________________ PyPA-Committers mailing list -- pypa-committers@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to pypa-committers-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/pypa-committers.python.org/ Member address: brett@python.org
_______________________________________________ PyPA-Committers mailing list -- pypa-committers@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to pypa-committers-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/pypa-committers.python.org/ Member address: gaborjbernat@gmail.com
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 20:13, Bernat Gabor <gaborjbernat@gmail.com> wrote:
I think no one objected and the timeline passed so the proposal has been accepted. It's all yours, as far as I understand.
Correct. Brett is now marked as PEP-delegate in the PEP (changed 8 days ago). Sorry my bad, I probably should have announced the result somewhere. I got muddled with the discussion happening in 3 different places. I'll post a quick announcement on Discourse. Beyond that, it's really back to CAM to progress the PEP now, I guess. I'm still sponsor, but I don't think there's anything particular I need to say, it's just "get the PEP in a state for pronouncement, and then submit it". Paul
participants (6)
-
Bernat Gabor -
Brett Cannon -
Filipe Laíns -
Ian Stapleton Cordasco -
Matthias Bussonnier -
Paul Moore