On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 12:29 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
Moving to a DVCS, putting a core language change moratorium in place for a few years, then looking to see what improvements have been developed outside the core tree as the moratorium is running down (and what feedback has been received over that time) would be far more sensible.
But the merges into the core will be tough. Imagine submitting a 5000-line patch and saying "I've worked on this for a year, please adopt it." Will we do enough code review to assert the code quality?
-- --Guido van Rossum
PS. My elbow needs a couple more weeks of rest. Limiting myself to ultra-short emails.
Frankly, if a feature isn't interesting enough to convince a core dev to take a few good hard looks at the code over the length of time you've proposed for the moratorium, it probably doesn't deserve to be in the language anyway. At least, that's my view. Geremy Condra