[Distutils] Please don't impose additional barriers to participation

Ian Cordasco graffatcolmingov at gmail.com
Wed Oct 28 14:33:06 EDT 2015

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:31 AM, M.-A. Lemburg <mal at egenix.com> wrote:
> On 28.10.2015 06:02, Ben Finney wrote:
>> Marcus Smith <qwcode at gmail.com> writes:
>>> 1) *Please*, *please*, *please* let's start doing PEP conversations as
>>> PRs to pypa/interoperability-peps : )
>> Please keep the conversation on a mailing list where one can participate
>> without needing to sign up with any particular service provider.
>> Your proposal would have the effect of excluding people from the
>> conversation if they don't agree to have a GitHub account. I think it's
>> valuable to avoid that barrier to entry, needing only an email account.
> I agree with Ben. Discussions on PEPs need to happen on mailing lists,
> not hidden away on some issue tracker or PR ticket.

Others may be willing to tolerate your FUD, but without concrete
reasons against GitHub (other than zomg it's a proprietary service) I
don't see a reason to not use the pull request flow on an open
repository that is free for people to clone, fork, contribute to, etc.

GitHub isn't my preferred hosting platform for git but it is the
defacto standard and it's workflow ubiquitous, documented, and far
more user-friendly than mailing list threads (especially when they
devolve into ideology wars).

Also nothing precludes mailing list discussions, so without details
about your objections, I don't see why this should be held up.

More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list