I have to say that I agree with Raymond here. I don't think that an
issue tracker is a good way to collect this sort of feedback. To be
honest, I don't feel that there's going to be much scope to address
the sorts of concerns being raised here, so I'm not clear how much
value there will be in the discussion, ultimately, but I do think that
having a single conversation/thread/topic that covers the "big
picture" is important, as for some people the problem is going to be
an accumulation of small problems, rather than any one big
showstopper. And tracker items have, in my experience, a tendency to
dilute the impact of that sort of accumulation.
It seems like the idea here is that we handle the discussion on how to
use the github tracker for Python issues, by using a github tracker
for the plan. Does that not result in a problem, because people
uncomfortable with the github tracker will be uncomfortable with the
means they are required to use to express that discomfort, and so
their voice won't get heard? Personally, I have a workflow that works
(just about) for me, for handling any given github issue tracker
(filtering email notifications to a dedicated folder for the tracker)
but that method does not scale very well, and it *definitely* doesn't
work for following trackers on an adhoc basis. So I'm not going to
easily be able to follow discussion on the
tracker-for-discussing-issues-with-the-proposed-cpython-issue-tracker
(ERROR: Recursion depth exceeded ;-)) So I guess I give up and leave
the decision to others. In my case, not that big of a deal, as I don't
use the current tracker that heavily - but if someone like Raymond
takes that view, that's (IMO) quite a lot more serious.
Paul
On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 at 06:20, <raymond.hettinger@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Are you saying that this whole thread of issues will be ignored unless we all go to another forum, post a dozen separate issues, and recreate all of the discussion that already these threads?
>
> That doesn't seem reasonable to me for several reasons: 1) it is unlikely that the full thread content would survive the forum transfer, so that some important aspects of the conversation will be lost, 2) some of us have very few clocks cycles available to allocate because discussion threads and actual core development, 3) this is outside our historical norm -- we normally do PEP level discussions on the lists rather than in many separate issues, 4) the separate issue approach (particularly if it is in core-workflow) won't have much visibility or participation for the folks who currently do most of the work on the tracker, and 5) having separate issues tends to obscure the big picture of how much functionality will be lost as a result of the migration and how much disruption will be caused by breaking existing user conversations and losing searchable history.
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list -- python-committers@python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-committers-leave@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-committers.python.org/
> Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-committers@python.org/message/2HWYHURO7XETBZO7YR4V6JDWX3FA2OA5/
> Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
_______________________________________________
python-committers mailing list -- python-committers@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-committers-leave@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-committers.python.org/
Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-committers@python.org/message/C2RRCOM2XN2D77RWCID72YDOLN5V33I5/
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/