On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 9:25 PM, Mark Lawrence firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On 04/04/2015 05:18, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 7:33 PM, anatoly techtonik email@example.com wrote:
Author is me, so you can ask directly. Why I didn't propose to redesign? Because people will assume that somebody will need to write PEP and will force me to write one. I don't believe in "redesign by specification" like current PEP process assumes and people accuse me of being lazy and trolling them, because I don't want to write the PEPs. Damn, I believe in iterative development and evolution, and I failed to persuade coredevs that practices digged up by people under the "agile" label is not some sort of corporate bullshit. So it is not my problem now. I did all I am capable of.
Why, exactly, is it that you don't want to author a PEP? Is it because you don't have the time to devote to chairing the discussion and all? If so, you could quite possibly persuade someone else to. I'd be willing to take on the job; convince me that your core idea is worth pursuing (and make clear to me precisely what your core idea is), and I could do the grunt-work of writing. But you say that you "don't *believe in*" the process, which suggests a more philosophical objection. What's the issue, here? Why are you holding back from such a plan? *cue the troll music*
There are many Pythons in the world. You can't just hack on CPython and expect everything to follow on from there. Someone has to explain to the Jython folks what they'll have to do to be compatible. Someone has to write something up so MicroPython can run the same code that CPython does. Someone, somewhere, has to be able to ensure that Brython users aren't caught out by your proposed change. PEPs provide that. (They also provide useful pointers for the "What's New" lists, eg PEP 441.)
So, are you proposing a change to Python? Then propose it.
I don't understand why people bother with this gentleman. All talk, no action, but expects others to do his bidding. I would say "Please go take a running jump", but that would get me into trouble with the CoC aficionados, so I won't.
What action can I do if I point that CLA is invalid, and nobody answers to my call? I don't agree that people are signing it without understanding the content in detail, and I got banned for it. I sent a few patches to tracker, but what's the point if people are afraid to apply even the doc fixes. Instead of obeying the order of copyright lawyers from the paper age, the role of any Internet Community is to understand and guard its own interests and protect its way of doing things. Instead of that, the community is just places a roadblock, because "lawyers know better".
Anti-offtopic. If you want to see, what I do, and want to enable some of the big things that can come up in the future, please help resolve this issue with Jinja2, Python 2 and setdefaultencoding utf-8 - http://issues.roundup-tracker.org/issue2550811 - just as a core developer, send us a patch that we should commit to enable Roundup work with Jinja2 again.
This a key to add "modules" field to tracker to track patches submitted to different modules (using modstats.py from https://bitbucket.org/techtonik/python-stdlib) and split the work for different interested parties. This key lower the barrier to entry by removing the need to learn XML and TAL stuff from designers who want to experiment with Python tracker to add stuff, like marking modules that need a redesign.