On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 02:00, Tarek Ziadé
<ziade.tarek@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:
[..]
>>>
>>> Without a BDFL, I think we need a committee to make decisions, e.g. by
>>> majority vote amongst committers.
>>
>> Couldn't we just go with the FLUFL?
>
> IIRC in the IETF this is done by the committee chair. I think it's a
> good idea to have this be a single person to avoid endless indecision.
BPD = Benevolent Pep Dictator
BPC = Benevolent Pep Caliph (sounds good in French, not sure in English ;) )
What about naming several BPD + and have one BPC elected each year by
all the core devs ?
== BPD ==
I am not sure if this would work for all areas in Python-core, but
looking at the maintainers.rst file, it looks like we could name for
example Brett for all the import machinery things, Marc-André for all
the unicode things, I could be the one about packaging, etc.
If we could manage to split the python-core development into
categories, and add these categories in the PEP metadata, that would
define who takes the final decision in case we can't reach consensus.
This sounds like the lieutenant setup they have for the Linux kernel. I have no clue how that works out for them.
== BPC ==
Of course some PEPs could concern several categories, so we would
still need some kind of Pep dictator if there's no consensus. So what
about electing a BPC every year ?
So there is a "single voice" issue here (that also applies to Martin's idea of having the release manager make the call as that is a rotating position). One of the reasons, I think, the BDFL style of decision making has worked out is that it lets Guido keep Python consistent; the language is always striving to meet his mental model of the language more and more. Having this rotate amongst us will not allow us to have this benefit. It also raises the chance of arguing over who takes over the rotating position and that just falls down into the hellish hole of politics that I don't think any of us want to see happen.
But even ignoring my worry/point, what are we even discussing here? Guido has said multiple time he is not retiring, simply scaling back his involvement. So are we trying to figure out how to make our own decisions about Python when Guido is not available to make one or simply doesn't care enough to pronounce? If that's the case then we should probably choose a vice BDFL (sort of a Benevolent Dicatator at Guido's Discretion) to keep the voice of Python as uniform as possible. I guess this person would become the assumed successor of the BDFL title if Guido ever does retire and the decision is made to continue on with active development of the language instead of just going into maintenance mode, but hopefully that problem will be a long ways off.
If we are discussing something else, then I don't know what we are all talking about here other than measurements of standard pieces of wood. =)
-Brett