On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 at 01:25, Steve Dower steve.dower@python.org wrote:
Here is the text of PEP 8013 for discussion and improvement (in isolation from the other proposals, of course -- we're not ready for the shoot-out yet.)
I'm keen to see the model be considered, but I don't feel the need to tightly control the specific content in the PEP, so feel free to send your own PRs if you have definitive improvements.
Thanks for the write-up Steve. If we did go down the "independent advisory council" route, I'd actually prefer to see it used to strengthen the BDFL-Delegate system rather than weaken it: the role of the advisory council would only be to step in when there was a dispute amongst the core developers as to whether or not there was a suitable volunteer available to serve as BDFL-Delegate, or if there was a proposal where nobody was volunteering to be the final decision maker, but the council thought the prospective gains on offer were sufficiently large to make it worthwhile to attempt to change that state of affairs.
The other aspects would pretty much remain the same as you suggest - the advisory council would mainly be there to help BDFL-Delegates out when it came time to end discussion of a proposal and make their decision (whether for or against) stick.
Cheers, Nick.
-- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia