possible future PEP discussion format [was: Transfer of power]
On 07/12/2018 01:27 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
For the bigger decisions (and there aren't many coming up), I have some suggestions on ways to improve the discussions so that the interested parties can have a more equal say in the outcome and so that the discussions can be more time efficient (it takes too much time to keep-up with long-running, active threads).
Essentially the idea would be have a wiki/faq editable by all the participants. It would include the key examples, arguments for and against, and rebuttals which can be collected into a current-state-of-the-conversation. This would be somewhat different than the current PEP process because currently PEP authors dominate the conversation and others can get drowned out too easily. (This idea is modeled on the California Legislative Analyst Voters Guide which summarizes proposals and has statements and rebuttals from both proponents and opponents).
I really like this idea. I stopped reading the PEP 572 threads once it was painfully obvious that almost all new replies were just saying the same things over and over and over...
-- ~Ethan~
On 2018-07-13, Ethan Furman wrote:
I stopped reading the PEP 572 threads once it was painfully obvious that almost all new replies were just saying the same things over and over and over...
Perhaps this can be seen as a kind of economic problem. What is the cost of posting to a PEP discussion thread vs the cost of everyone reading that post? Or, what is the value of the comment vs what is cost for everyone to read it?
With the current discussion method, the costs are often disproportionate. You have hundreds of people reading the thread. So that cost is pretty high. Posting a half-baked comment is too easy. Starting a new thread with a new subject line is too easy.
One idea is to have a list dedicated to PEP discussions. We could establish a set of rules (cultural norms) for discussion on that list. E.g.
do your background research before posting: read PEP in its entirety, read complete PEP discussion thread
make high quality posts: ensure your points are truly bringing new ideas forth, present them clearly and succinctly
lay down rules for subject lines of posts, when you can start a new thread. Off topic discussion should go back to python-ideas.
python-ideas can remain a free-wheeling wild west. Make the PEP discussion list a formal discussion forum. If people don't follow the rules, warn them and ultimately ban them from the list.
Thinking about subject line rules, it would be helpful to organize threads by PEP, by topic and sub-topic. E.g.
PEP 572: R: informal educator feedback
PEP 572: S: comprehension scope
PEP 572: S: operator precedence of :=Possible topic abbreviations:
R: Rationale
S: Syntax and semantics
E: ExamplesRegards,
Neil
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 13:14 Neil Schemenauer, nas-python@arctrix.com wrote:
On 2018-07-13, Ethan Furman wrote:
I stopped reading the PEP 572 threads once it was painfully obvious that almost all new replies were just saying the same things over and over and over...
Perhaps this can be seen as a kind of economic problem. What is the cost of posting to a PEP discussion thread vs the cost of everyone reading that post? Or, what is the value of the comment vs what is cost for everyone to read it?
With the current discussion method, the costs are often disproportionate. You have hundreds of people reading the thread. So that cost is pretty high. Posting a half-baked comment is too easy. Starting a new thread with a new subject line is too easy.
While I'm not ready to start talking about a tweaked PEP process, I will say that this disproportionate cost is definitely an issue from my perspective.
-Brett
One idea is to have a list dedicated to PEP discussions. We could establish a set of rules (cultural norms) for discussion on that list. E.g.
do your background research before posting: read PEP in its entirety, read complete PEP discussion thread
make high quality posts: ensure your points are truly bringing new ideas forth, present them clearly and succinctly
lay down rules for subject lines of posts, when you can start a new thread. Off topic discussion should go back to python-ideas.
python-ideas can remain a free-wheeling wild west. Make the PEP discussion list a formal discussion forum. If people don't follow the rules, warn them and ultimately ban them from the list.
Thinking about subject line rules, it would be helpful to organize threads by PEP, by topic and sub-topic. E.g.
PEP 572: R: informal educator feedback PEP 572: S: comprehension scope PEP 572: S: operator precedence of :=Possible topic abbreviations:
R: Rationale S: Syntax and semantics E: ExamplesRegards,
Neil
python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
participants (3)
-
Brett Cannon -
Ethan Furman -
Neil Schemenauer