If you like the way mail.python.org and Mailman (both 2 and 3) Just Work, and are about as reliable as any service can be, we have our wonderful postmasters to thank. Mark has been a postmaster for years and is currently maintaining GNU Mailman, both as a project and as a service on mpo. Abhilash maintains the GNU Mailman 3 branch, has been project leader since I retired in that role back in 2017, and also maintains the Mailman 3 instance on mail.python.org.
More than that, because of their roles as Mailman developers, they have a deep knowledge of email in general, and in the email package in particular. As I rarely dabble in the email package these days, and RDM --who did a fantastic job of implementing the new APIs and features in email for Python 3— has also scaled back his involvement, it means that the email package doesn’t get much attention these days. Both Mark and Abhilash have an interest in helping to maintain the email package moving forward, and both are eminently qualified to do so.
I have worked with both of them for many many years, and I have the utmost respect for their technical and social skills, their understanding of Python processes, and their love of the Python language and community. I've sprinted with them at many Pycons, until I scaled back my involvement with Mailman. Both are here sprinting at Pycon 2019.
Therefore, with their permission, I propose extending core developer rights to both Mark and Abhilash.
As per PEP 13, I plan on opening a vote on Discourse next week (once I kind of recover from Pycon) for each developer.
Cheers, -Barry
A link to a list of CPython commits (Pull Requests) for both these guys would be greatly appreciated.
On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 1:59 PM Barry Warsaw barry@python.org wrote:
If you like the way mail.python.org and Mailman (both 2 and 3) Just Work, and are about as reliable as any service can be, we have our wonderful postmasters to thank. Mark has been a postmaster for years and is currently maintaining GNU Mailman, both as a project and as a service on mpo. Abhilash maintains the GNU Mailman 3 branch, has been project leader since I retired in that role back in 2017, and also maintains the Mailman 3 instance on mail.python.org.
More than that, because of their roles as Mailman developers, they have a deep knowledge of email in general, and in the email package in particular. As I rarely dabble in the email package these days, and RDM --who did a fantastic job of implementing the new APIs and features in email for Python 3— has also scaled back his involvement, it means that the email package doesn’t get much attention these days. Both Mark and Abhilash have an interest in helping to maintain the email package moving forward, and both are eminently qualified to do so.
I have worked with both of them for many many years, and I have the utmost respect for their technical and social skills, their understanding of Python processes, and their love of the Python language and community. I've sprinted with them at many Pycons, until I scaled back my involvement with Mailman. Both are here sprinting at Pycon 2019.
Therefore, with their permission, I propose extending core developer rights to both Mark and Abhilash.
As per PEP 13, I plan on opening a vote on Discourse next week (once I kind of recover from Pycon) for each developer.
Cheers, -Barry
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/
I'd like to second Andrew's request.
Regards
Antoine.
Le 09/05/2019 à 21:14, Andrew Svetlov a écrit :
A link to a list of CPython commits (Pull Requests) for both these guys would be greatly appreciated.
On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 1:59 PM Barry Warsaw barry@python.org wrote:
If you like the way mail.python.org and Mailman (both 2 and 3) Just Work, and are about as reliable as any service can be, we have our wonderful postmasters to thank. Mark has been a postmaster for years and is currently maintaining GNU Mailman, both as a project and as a service on mpo. Abhilash maintains the GNU Mailman 3 branch, has been project leader since I retired in that role back in 2017, and also maintains the Mailman 3 instance on mail.python.org.
More than that, because of their roles as Mailman developers, they have a deep knowledge of email in general, and in the email package in particular. As I rarely dabble in the email package these days, and RDM --who did a fantastic job of implementing the new APIs and features in email for Python 3— has also scaled back his involvement, it means that the email package doesn’t get much attention these days. Both Mark and Abhilash have an interest in helping to maintain the email package moving forward, and both are eminently qualified to do so.
I have worked with both of them for many many years, and I have the utmost respect for their technical and social skills, their understanding of Python processes, and their love of the Python language and community. I've sprinted with them at many Pycons, until I scaled back my involvement with Mailman. Both are here sprinting at Pycon 2019.
Therefore, with their permission, I propose extending core developer rights to both Mark and Abhilash.
As per PEP 13, I plan on opening a vote on Discourse next week (once I kind of recover from Pycon) for each developer.
Cheers, -Barry
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/
Hi,
To be honest, my first reaction is the same than Andrew and Antoine: I don't know these 2 contributors. I didn't see them around the bug tracker, reviews, nor in commits.
The definition of what is a core developer is still a work-in-progress :-) The PEP 13 tries to define it:
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0013/#the-core-team
I'm no longer sure myself that I can define them. I prefer to repeat what others say :-) Basically, a core developers is someone who produces commits :-) That's one definition. Another one is someone who a very good background to produce very good reviews and mentor contributors. In which case can we put Mark Sapiro and Abhilash Raj?
Le jeu. 9 mai 2019 à 21:14, Andrew Svetlov andrew.svetlov@gmail.com a écrit :
If you like the way mail.python.org and Mailman (both 2 and 3) Just Work, and are about as reliable as any service can be, we have our wonderful postmasters to thank. Mark has been a postmaster for years and is currently maintaining GNU Mailman, both as a project and as a service on mpo. Abhilash maintains the GNU Mailman 3 branch, has been project leader since I retired in that role back in 2017, and also maintains the Mailman 3 instance on mail.python.org.
Having a sustainable Mailman project is great. But how does that relate to Python itself? Are you talking about the email module? Do Mark Sapiro and Abhilash Raj plan to maintain the email module?
I found "Mark Sapiro" mentioned in 4 commits (3 in 2013, 1 in 2006).
Abhilash Raj authored 1 commit in 2015 and 1 in 2014: both in the email module.
Sorry, I didn't dig into the bug tracker / GitHub to check if they are active there.
More than that, because of their roles as Mailman developers, they have a deep knowledge of email in general, and in the email package in particular. As I rarely dabble in the email package these days, and RDM --who did a fantastic job of implementing the new APIs and features in email for Python 3— has also scaled back his involvement, it means that the email package doesn’t get much attention these days. Both Mark and Abhilash have an interest in helping to maintain the email package moving forward, and both are eminently qualified to do so.
I would prefer to first see them more involved upstream, before starting to discuss promoting them. They are other contributors who are way more active than them.
In the meanwhile, they don't have to be core devs to help to maintain the email module, no?
I'm not sure about giving the core dev status as a recognizition for their work on a different project. It sounds unfair to contributors who are working on Python but are not core dev. There are other ways to recognize valuable persons in the Python community, like the PSF Community Awards and PSF Fellows.
Victor
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death.
Le 13/05/2019 à 10:14, Victor Stinner a écrit :
I would prefer to first see them more involved upstream, before starting to discuss promoting them. They are other contributors who are way more active than them.
In the meanwhile, they don't have to be core devs to help to maintain the email module, no?
I'm not sure about giving the core dev status as a recognizition for their work on a different project. It sounds unfair to contributors who are working on Python but are not core dev. There are other ways to recognize valuable persons in the Python community, like the PSF Community Awards and PSF Fellows.
I'll also point out that giving core dev status to people who are active on different projects but not CPython didn't lead to any significant results in the past (I'm thinking about e.g. the Twisted core devs).
This is not a criticism about particular people, simply a reflection on our own practice. We should recognize that we don't attract active contributors by giving them status upfront.
Regards
Antoine.
On May 13, 2019, at 01:14, Victor Stinner vstinner@redhat.com wrote:
I'm no longer sure myself that I can define them. I prefer to repeat what others say :-) Basically, a core developers is someone who produces commits :-) That's one definition.
But, IMHO not a correct one. The full quote from PEP 13:
——snip snip—— Python core team members demonstrate:
• a good grasp of the philosophy of the Python Project • a solid track record of being constructive and helpful • significant contributions to the project's goals, in any form • willingness to dedicate some time to improving Python
As the project matures, contributions go beyond code. Here's an incomplete list of areas where contributions may be considered for joining the core team, in no particular order:
• Working on community management and outreach • Providing support on the mailing lists and on IRC • Triaging tickets • Writing patches (code, docs, or tests) • Reviewing patches (code, docs, or tests) • Participating in design decisions • Providing expertise in a particular domain (security, i18n, etc.) • Managing the continuous integration infrastructure • Managing the servers (website, tracker, documentation, etc.) • Maintaining related projects (alternative interpreters, core infrastructure like packaging, etc.) • Creating visual designs
Core team membership acknowledges sustained and valuable efforts that align well with the philosophy and the goals of the Python project. ——snip snip——
I’m quite convinced that both Mark and Abhilash meet these requirements. And they are almost by definition the experts in the email package. You can certainly see the nature of their work in the Mailman repos, and I would be willing to mentor them through the first few commits to the CPython repo, though I think it will be mostly perfunctory.
Having a sustainable Mailman project is great. But how does that relate to Python itself? Are you talking about the email module? Do Mark Sapiro and Abhilash Raj plan to maintain the email module?
Yes, that is the intent.
In the meanwhile, they don't have to be core devs to help to maintain the email module, no?
Do we have any core developers who want to maintain it? Not me :) and apparently not RDM.
-Barry
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 4:11 PM Barry Warsaw barry@python.org wrote:
On May 13, 2019, at 01:14, Victor Stinner vstinner@redhat.com wrote:
I'm no longer sure myself that I can define them. I prefer to repeat what others say :-) Basically, a core developers is someone who produces commits :-) That's one definition.
But, IMHO not a correct one. The full quote from PEP 13:
——snip snip—— Python core team members demonstrate:
• a good grasp of the philosophy of the Python Project • a solid track record of being constructive and helpful • significant contributions to the project's goals, in any form • willingness to dedicate some time to improving Python
As the project matures, contributions go beyond code. Here's an incomplete list of areas where contributions may be considered for joining the core team, in no particular order:
• Working on community management and outreach • Providing support on the mailing lists and on IRC • Triaging tickets • Writing patches (code, docs, or tests) • Reviewing patches (code, docs, or tests) • Participating in design decisions • Providing expertise in a particular domain (security, i18n, etc.) • Managing the continuous integration infrastructure • Managing the servers (website, tracker, documentation, etc.) • Maintaining related projects (alternative interpreters, core infrastructure like packaging, etc.) • Creating visual designs
Core team membership acknowledges sustained and valuable efforts that align well with the philosophy and the goals of the Python project. ——snip snip——
I’m quite convinced that both Mark and Abhilash meet these requirements. And they are almost by definition the experts in the email package. You can certainly see the nature of their work in the Mailman repos, and I would be willing to mentor them through the first few commits to the CPython repo, though I think it will be mostly perfunctory.
Having a sustainable Mailman project is great. But how does that relate to Python itself? Are you talking about the email module? Do Mark Sapiro and Abhilash Raj plan to maintain the email module?
Yes, that is the intent.
In the meanwhile, they don't have to be core devs to help to maintain the email module, no?
Do we have any core developers who want to maintain it? Not me :) and apparently not RDM.
I think these two make sense as email module maintainers from a demonstrated domain expertise point of view.
But you'll probably have an easier time convincing others who want to see some PRs first if you just go ahead and have them do some work on the email module in the form of PRs to start with. ie: Don't let being dubbed core developers or not yet block you from starting to mentor them on initial email module maintenance.
-gps
-Barry
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/
Le 14/05/2019 à 01:19, Gregory P. Smith a écrit :
I think these two make sense as email module maintainers from a demonstrated domain expertise point of view.
But you'll probably have an easier time convincing others who want to see some PRs first if you just go ahead and have them do some work on the email module in the form of PRs to start with. ie: Don't let being dubbed core developers or not yet block you from starting to mentor them on initial email module maintenance.
Right, that sounds like the best course of action. Barry, if you trust Mark's and Abhilash's competence, it should probably be easy for you to merge their first PRs (and guide them along the way).
Regards
Antoine.
I think Mark and Abhilash would be the perfect choice to (help) maintain the email package.
They have done a great job on making sure Mailman works for us and know from real world experience what the issues are you face nowadays with email (such as having to deal with the wonderful technology called DMARC...).
On 14.05.2019 09:46, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Le 14/05/2019 à 01:19, Gregory P. Smith a écrit :
I think these two make sense as email module maintainers from a demonstrated domain expertise point of view.
But you'll probably have an easier time convincing others who want to see some PRs first if you just go ahead and have them do some work on the email module in the form of PRs to start with. ie: Don't let being dubbed core developers or not yet block you from starting to mentor them on initial email module maintenance.
Right, that sounds like the best course of action. Barry, if you trust Mark's and Abhilash's competence, it should probably be easy for you to merge their first PRs (and guide them along the way).
Working on email package under Barry mentorship looks like a good idea and a first step to promoting Mark and Abhilash. Also, we can give them bug triaging privilegy to help with managing existing 150+ email related bug reports right now, it doesn't hurt.
After some mentorship period, we can consider promoting them to Core Devs again. Mentorship is always a very important and required part for our workflow, regardless of tech expertise. We always are striving to get PR review (except very trivial changes maybe). Personally, the ability to press the green "merge" button doesn't change too much in my work (but requires more responsibility, sure).
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 11:00 AM M.-A. Lemburg mal@egenix.com wrote:
I think Mark and Abhilash would be the perfect choice to (help) maintain the email package.
They have done a great job on making sure Mailman works for us and know from real world experience what the issues are you face nowadays with email (such as having to deal with the wonderful technology called DMARC...).
On 14.05.2019 09:46, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Le 14/05/2019 à 01:19, Gregory P. Smith a écrit :
I think these two make sense as email module maintainers from a demonstrated domain expertise point of view.
But you'll probably have an easier time convincing others who want to see some PRs first if you just go ahead and have them do some work on the email module in the form of PRs to start with. ie: Don't let being dubbed core developers or not yet block you from starting to mentor them on initial email module maintenance.
Right, that sounds like the best course of action. Barry, if you trust Mark's and Abhilash's competence, it should probably be easy for you to merge their first PRs (and guide them along the way).
-- Marc-Andre Lemburg eGenix.com
Professional Python Services directly from the Experts (#1, May 14 2019)
Python Projects, Coaching and Consulting ... http://www.egenix.com/ Python Database Interfaces ... http://products.egenix.com/ Plone/Zope Database Interfaces ... http://zope.egenix.com/
::: We implement business ideas - efficiently in both time and costs :::
eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH Pastor-Loeh-Str.48 D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611 http://www.egenix.com/company/contact/ http://www.malemburg.com/
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/
On May 14, 2019, at 00:46, Antoine Pitrou antoine@python.org wrote:
Barry, if you trust Mark's and Abhilash's competence, it should probably be easy for you to merge their first PRs (and guide them along the way).
I do, and that works for me. Can we give them triage rights on bpo now?
-Barry
Hi Barry,
I gave the bug triage permission to:
Mark Sapiro: https://bugs.python.org/user2507 Abhilash Raj: https://bugs.python.org/user18684
I use the links to profile, so you can double check that I picked the right person :-) For example, Raj has a second account (latest update: 2014, whereas the other one was updated in 2017). https://bugs.python.org/user19558
I sent an email to Mark and Raj with some explanations how to triage bugs.
Victor
Le mar. 14 mai 2019 à 18:38, Barry Warsaw barry@python.org a écrit :
On May 14, 2019, at 00:46, Antoine Pitrou antoine@python.org wrote:
Barry, if you trust Mark's and Abhilash's competence, it should probably be easy for you to merge their first PRs (and guide them along the way).
I do, and that works for me. Can we give them triage rights on bpo now?
-Barry
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/
-- Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death.
On 5/13/2019 7:11 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On May 13, 2019, at 01:14, Victor Stinner vstinner@redhat.com wrote:
I'm no longer sure myself that I can define them. I prefer to repeat what others say :-) Basically, a core developers is someone who produces commits :-) That's one definition.
But, IMHO not a correct one.
I think 'half complete' rather than 'not correct' is more accurate. There are two main effects of being granted 'core developer' status.
- One may edit and merge PRs by onself or others into a python
repository and in particular python/cypthon . This, expanded, is Victor's 'produce commits'.
- One may participate in coredev-only discussions and votes.
These are the activities that differentiate of a 'core developer' and it is not wrong to say that a core developer is one who may do these.
The full quote from PEP 13: ——snip snip—— Python core team members demonstrate:
• a good grasp of the philosophy of the Python Project • a solid track record of being constructive and helpful • significant contributions to the project's goals, in any form • willingness to dedicate some time to improving Python
This are qualities and history that once should have to become a core developer. For producing commits, one should, in particular, understand the difference, as used here, between 'bug fix' and 'enhancement' and support the policy of not adding enhancements to x.y after x.y.0 (after .b1, actually). (The devguide says something about this, but I don't know if it is clear enough.)
As the project matures, contributions go beyond code. Here's an incomplete list of areas where contributions may be considered for joining the core team, in no particular order:
'may', not 'should' or 'must'. Different existing coredevs may legitimately give these different weights.
• Working on community management and outreach
...
• Creating visual designs
Neither of these two speak to being qualified to produce commits. Many of those I snipped do.
Core team membership acknowledges sustained and valuable efforts that align well with the philosophy and the goals of the Python project. ——snip snip——
This sentence could be misinterpreted as saying that codedev status is an award for past contributions rather than an enabling greater future contributions.
Summarizing the general considerations, I have two questions for any candidate.
- Do you want to become a core developer and do you intend to use the
commit privilege? If not, the question is not worth our time.
- Do you understand our definition of 'bug fix' versus 'enhancement'
and how and why the difference is important. If not,
I’m quite convinced that both Mark and Abhilash meet these requirements. And they are almost by definition the experts in the email package. You can certainly see the nature of their work in the Mailman repos, and I would be willing to mentor them through the first few commits to the CPython repo, though I think it will be mostly perfunctory.
Having a sustainable Mailman project is great. But how does that relate to Python itself? Are you talking about the email module? Do Mark Sapiro and Abhilash Raj plan to maintain the email module?
Yes, that is the intent.
In the meanwhile, they don't have to be core devs to help to maintain the email module, no?
Do we have any core developers who want to maintain it? Not me :) and apparently not RDM.
I searched the tracker for open issues with the email component marked. I was somewhat surprised to see 151, which is about the number for IDLE a few years ago. We definitely need an active core developer working on email and team of two who can work together and check each other's work would be good. (If and when we do, I can give suggestions, if asked, on managing such an intimidating pile.)
-- Terry
-
Andrew Svetlov -
Antoine Pitrou -
Barry Warsaw -
Gregory P. Smith -
M.-A. Lemburg -
Terry Reedy -
Victor Stinner