On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 at 11:04, Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:53 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
This is exactly the kind of arbitrary decision making by an insufficiently representative group that led to us banning making any binding decisions at language summits: their in-person nature means that they're inherently exclusive environments that lead to requirements being overlooked and decisions being made without involving most of the people affected.
Did you see Brett's email here, especially the last few paragraphs?
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/2018-September/006100.ht...
I don't know how the Discourse experiment will turn out, and I know it won't make everyone happy, but I hope it works. Because we *know* that what we're doing now is making people miserable and driving them away. The push to try Discourse may or may not be misguided, but it's not coming out of a few people having a whim over lunch together.
Who's "we"? I thought I was part of "we" when it came to the Python core dev team...
P.S.: I found that link using my usual method for finding mailing list archive links, which is: first I did a search in my local MUA, found the email I wanted, noted the date, then manually went to the mailing list archives and clicked through the messages around that date until I found it. This *sucks*.
But at least it was *possible*. Personally I do a Google search rather than using my MUA, but the point is that while it's clumsy, it's known technology. I don't even know how I'd find a link to an old message in Discourse, but I assume it's not searchable via Google? Sure, I can learn. But how about a member of the general public (after all, python-committers is supposed to be restricted for posting, but publicly visible)?
On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 at 10:40, Łukasz Langa <lukasz@langa.pl> wrote:
Hold on. Out of the 30-something committers active in the past two releases, 20-something were at the sprint. (I can pull more detailed stats but I'm on the phone now.) Setting up Discourse with the intent of replacing the mailing lists met no opposition at the sprint. By all counts, the group was sufficiently representative and involved most of the people affected.
Hold on in return. Are committers *not* active in the past two releases not considered? Your figures seem biased. (Was I part of that 30? I committed some changes in the last 2 releases. Barely anything, and I do *not* consider myself very active in terms of code changes, but how many tiers are we working with here? People who were at the sprints, people "active in the past 2 releases", "the rest"?
I don't want to seem to accuse people of agendas - everyone's acting in the best interests of the community - but it does feel like the community is fragmenting at the moment :-(
Paul