On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl@gmx.net> wrote:
Antoine Pitrou schrieb:
Guido van Rossum <guido@...> writes:
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?
Pardon for hijacking the moratorium discussion, but this is the kind of problem we already have with externally-maintained modules (such as json). The way they are updated is that once in a while (once a year perhaps), their author comes with a huge patch that we should ideally review, except that it's very difficult to do so -- especially given that it's about a piece of code that we don't know well in the first place.
But we haven't really put a review policy into place for core commits, and since the authors of those packages all (?) are core devs, we trust them enough to commit to the core. It's different with DVCS branches created by "only" community members.
<snip> My suggestion then would be to review them. There's a couple of years lead time before that needs to be done, and there will probably only be a very small number of these projects that ever bear any fruit. As I said in another thread, if thats not enough time to attract some developer's interest, then the feature probably wasn't good enough to land anyway. Geremy Condra