Nicholas Bastin wrote:
Not completely. More like -0 at the moment. We need a better system, but I think we shouldn't just pick a system because it's the one the PEP writer preferred - there should be some sort of effort to test a few systems (including bug trackers).
But that's how the PEP process works: the PEP author is supposed to collect feedback from the community in a fair way, but he is not required to implement every suggestion that the community makes. People who strongly disagree that the entire approach should be taken should write an alternative ("counter") PEP, proposing their strategy. In the end, the BDFL will pronounce which approach (if any) should be implemented. In the specific case, I'm personally not willing to discuss every SCM system out there. If somebody manages to make me curious (as Guido did with the bazaar posts), I will try it out, if I can find an easy way to do so. Your comments about (what was the name again) did not make me curious. As for bug trackers: this PEP is specifically *not* about bug trackers at all. If you think the SourceForge bugtracker should be replaced with something else, write a PEP. I really don't see a reasonable alternative to the SF bugtracker.
I know this is work, but this isn't just something we can change easily again later.
I don't bother asking who "we" is, here: apparently not you. Regards, Martin