anatoly techtonik writes:
I'll abandon my efforts when you prove me that current "documented process" is a top-notch way for all interested parties to do a quality contributions to make Python better.
I think the product of the process speaks very well for the process.
The most valuable contributions are coming from professionals, and these people often don't have enough time to follow "documented process".
I think you have that exactly backward. It is precisely the seasoned professionals who value process most. Professionals are good at managing their own time and can handle process if they can make it routine; but they get annoyed and go away if you break their routine. It's non-professional newcomers who are most attracted by minimal process.
the biggest problem with current "documented process" is that nobody even thinks about it.
Look harder. People thinking about the "Python process" are all over this list, not to mention featured PEP authors. (It's this kind of gratuitous exaggeration that Nick speaks of.) In general, you remind me of the "let's import Japanese practices" management consultancies of the '80s. They failed dismally, because none of the famous Japanese process innovations are standalone. They depend on each other and on a common culture, both lacking in the U.S. and Europe. That doesn't mean that quality circles, JIT, and the like haven't been successfully applied outside of Japan, but they work differently and organizations had to adapt both the Japanese practices and their existing processes to get any advantage from the innovations. I think the analogy to software process, including in open, open source projects like Python, is quite strong. If you want to change the process, I believe that the most effective way is kaizen, ie, gradually improving by sanding down some rough spots, not by whacking off whole subprocesses that you believe are wasteful. Truly wasteful subprocesses generally don't survive in this environment. You should look harder to figure out what they're good for, and then gradually wean the project from them by providing alternative ways to accomplish those goals that are less wasteful, but compatible with other aspects of the existing process.