On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 05:52:10PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org>: ...
As for process issues...I agree that we need better procedures and criteria for what goes into the library. As you know I've made a start on developing same, but my understanding has been that *you* don't think you'll have the bandwidth for it until 2.2 is out.
That's not an excuse for you to check in random bits of code.
So what, exactly, makes this 'random'?
That, Guido, is not a rhetorical question. We don't have any procedures. We don't have any guidelines. We don't have any history of anything but discussing submissions on python-dev before somebody with commit access checks them in. If no -1 votes and the judgment of somebody with commit privileges who has already got a lot of stuff in the library is not sufficient, *what is*?
I'm not trying to be difficult here, but this points at a weakness in our way of doing things. I want to play nice, but I can't if I don't know your actual rules. I don't know what *would* have been sufficient if what I did was not. I don't think anyone else does, either.
I've got a couple modules that may or may not be going into Lib. I described the general outline in PEP 268, and will begin developing those modules in nondist/sandbox sometime this week. Despite having commit privs, I'm not about to just toss those modules right into Lib. While there seems to be a very gentle consensus that they be included, they aren't even written. I'm using the PEP to describe the overall design to people so they can provide steering/commentary before coding starts. I'll be using the sandbox to give people a chance to see them as they develop and *before* they go into Lib. Hell... it even gives people a way to *assist*. Once I feel they're "done enough for an alpha release", then I'll post for a final call to move them to Lib. Of course, if we're in the beta time frame by then, then I may have some problems :-) (but they shouldn't go that long) Yes, I could simply write them and check them in. I feel quite comfortable claiming expertise in HTTP-based networking. But an immediate checkin has a very direct perception: "I know what I'm doing and don't need feedback." I've got a lot of respect for the other developers in this forum, and want any feedback they may have. Thus, I'll do what I can to provide that opportunity. [ we're all busy, so I'll get very little, but giving people the *chance* is a good warm&fuzzy and for the hope to get that *one* comment that really slaps me around to realize there is a Better Way ] The point here is: visibility, ability to provide feedback, and a stepwise process for moving modules from inception to Lib integration. It doesn't need to be written. It is simple a social thing, based on respect for your peers. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/