At 01:49 AM 6/13/2006 +0200, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
This should definitely be explained to authors who are donating libraries to the stdlib, because from my perspective it seemed to me that I was graciously volunteering to be responsible for *all* the work related to wsgiref.
It's not only about python-wide changes. It is also for regular error corrections: whenever I commit a bug fix that somebody contributed, I now have to understand the code, and the bug, and the fix.
Again, my point was that I was volunteering to do all of those things for wsgiref.
Under PEP 360, I have to do all of these, *plus* checking PEP 360 to determine whether I will step on somebodies' toes. I also have to consult PEP 291, of course, to find out whether the code has additional compatibility requirements.
In the wsgiref case, you mustn't forget PEP 333 either, actually. :)
So ideally, I would like to see the external maintainers state "we can deal with occasional breakage arising from somebody forgetting the procedures". This would scale, as it would put the responsibility for the code on the shoulders of the maintainer. It appears that Thomas Heller says this would work for him, and it worked for bsddb and PyXML.
I've also already said I can use Barry's approach, making the Python SVN repository version the primary home of wsgiref and taking snapshots to make releases from. I didn't realize that cross-directory linkages of that sort were allowed, or I'd have done it that way in the first place. Certainly it would've been a more effective use of my time to do so. :)