From trent at snakebite.org Mon Dec 24 18:07:36 2012 From: trent at snakebite.org (Trent Nelson) Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 12:07:36 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? Message-ID: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> He's pretty active on IRC and the tracker. I haven't dealt with any of his patches personally, but I know lots of others have. Thoughts? Trent. From kbk at shore.net Mon Dec 24 19:27:37 2012 From: kbk at shore.net (Kurt B. Kaiser) Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 13:27:37 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] Contributor Agreement - Todd Rovito Message-ID: <1356373657.12064.140661169828721.7CDEEAFF@webmail.messagingengine.com> We received by postal mail a contributor agreement from Todd V. Rovito 218 Bellemark St Middletown, OH 45042 rovitotv at gmail.com Apache License V2 I have added it to the agreements in my possession. KBK From eric at trueblade.com Mon Dec 24 19:23:38 2012 From: eric at trueblade.com (Eric V. Smith) Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 13:23:38 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> Message-ID: +1 -- Eric. On Dec 24, 2012, at 12:07 PM, Trent Nelson wrote: > He's pretty active on IRC and the tracker. I haven't dealt with any > of his patches personally, but I know lots of others have. Thoughts? > > Trent. > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > From senthil at uthcode.com Mon Dec 24 19:54:17 2012 From: senthil at uthcode.com (Senthil Kumaran) Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 10:54:17 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> Message-ID: Antoine had heralded for Serhiy's commit privs recently and had got a lot of approvals. Not sure what happened after that. It looks like he has already submitted contributor's agreement. Thanks, Senthil On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Trent Nelson wrote: > He's pretty active on IRC and the tracker. I haven't dealt with any > of his patches personally, but I know lots of others have. Thoughts? > > Trent. > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ncoghlan at gmail.com Tue Dec 25 01:29:57 2012 From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 10:29:57 +1000 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> Message-ID: IIRC, commit privileges have been offered based on the last thread, it's up to Serhiy when he wants to accept them. Perhaps the second nomination will persuade him to accept :) Cheers, Nick. -- Sent from my phone, thus the relative brevity :) On Dec 25, 2012 4:54 AM, "Senthil Kumaran" wrote: > Antoine had heralded for Serhiy's commit privs recently and had got a lot > of approvals. Not sure what happened after that. > It looks like he has already submitted contributor's agreement. > > Thanks, > Senthil > > > On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Trent Nelson wrote: > >> He's pretty active on IRC and the tracker. I haven't dealt with any >> of his patches personally, but I know lots of others have. Thoughts? >> >> Trent. >> _______________________________________________ >> python-committers mailing list >> python-committers at python.org >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers >> > > > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trent at snakebite.org Tue Dec 25 04:55:48 2012 From: trent at snakebite.org (Trent Nelson) Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 19:55:48 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> Message-ID: <5B976FC4-FAE4-4395-89CA-53E3EE5831F6@snakebite.org> That's odd... I can't see any e-mails in my python-committers folder regarding Serhiy, and I when I chatted to him today on IRC he seemed interested in commit privs. Let's blame Antoine. Merry Christmas! Trent. On Dec 24, 2012, at 7:29 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > IIRC, commit privileges have been offered based on the last thread, it's up to Serhiy when he wants to accept them. Perhaps the second nomination will persuade him to accept :) > > Cheers, > Nick. > > -- > Sent from my phone, thus the relative brevity :) > > On Dec 25, 2012 4:54 AM, "Senthil Kumaran" wrote: > Antoine had heralded for Serhiy's commit privs recently and had got a lot of approvals. Not sure what happened after that. > It looks like he has already submitted contributor's agreement. > > Thanks, > Senthil > > > On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Trent Nelson wrote: > He's pretty active on IRC and the tracker. I haven't dealt with any > of his patches personally, but I know lots of others have. Thoughts? > > Trent. > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > > > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > From chris.jerdonek at gmail.com Tue Dec 25 06:01:26 2012 From: chris.jerdonek at gmail.com (Chris Jerdonek) Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 21:01:26 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: <5B976FC4-FAE4-4395-89CA-53E3EE5831F6@snakebite.org> References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <5B976FC4-FAE4-4395-89CA-53E3EE5831F6@snakebite.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Trent Nelson wrote: > > On Dec 24, 2012, at 7:29 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > >> IIRC, commit privileges have been offered based on the last thread, it's up to Serhiy when he wants to accept them. Perhaps the second nomination will persuade him to accept :) > That's odd... I can't see any e-mails in my python-committers folder regarding Serhiy, and I when I chatted to him today on IRC he seemed interested in commit privs. The thread Nick is referring to is here: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/2012-October/002228.html The original nomination was here: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/2012-August/002142.html --Chris From ncoghlan at gmail.com Tue Dec 25 13:37:26 2012 From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 22:37:26 +1000 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Andrew Svetlov wrote: > Let's wait a bit. > > On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: >> From his response to me he seems to be unaware that there is a problem... >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Andrew Svetlov >> wrote: >>> >>> I've sent email to Anatoly in Russian describing current situation. >>> CC'ed Eli Bendersky and ?ukasz Langa as humans who understand Russian >>> well enough to be witness for my words. Did anything come of this? There are now a few more threads on python-ideas that are almost pure Anatoly-instigated noise :P I'm well and truly to the point of caring far more about the feelings of people who get frustrated trying to deal with his obtuseness (whether that arises deliberately or through genuine cluelessness) than I care about his feelings. He has the entire internet to play on, we don't have to allow him access to python.org controlled resources. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia From christian at python.org Tue Dec 25 14:01:27 2012 From: christian at python.org (Christian Heimes) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 14:01:27 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> Message-ID: <50D9A3A7.5080009@python.org> Am 25.12.2012 13:37, schrieb Nick Coghlan: > I'm well and truly to the point of caring far more about the feelings > of people who get frustrated trying to deal with his obtuseness > (whether that arises deliberately or through genuine cluelessness) > than I care about his feelings. He has the entire internet to play on, > we don't have to allow him access to python.org controlled resources. +1 He is so far beyond the point of political correctness and respectability that I'm unable to find any words for his behavior in my dictionary. His attitude hasn't improved, too. For example in bug http://bugs.python.org/issue16689 he used an offensive title and re-opened the ticket *twice* although it was closed by two different and highly respectable core devs. I hate to kick out people but I see no other way to deal with the issue anymore. :( Christian From andrew.svetlov at gmail.com Tue Dec 25 14:59:19 2012 From: andrew.svetlov at gmail.com (Andrew Svetlov) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 15:59:19 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Andrew Svetlov wrote: >> Let's wait a bit. >> >> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: >>> From his response to me he seems to be unaware that there is a problem... >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Andrew Svetlov >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I've sent email to Anatoly in Russian describing current situation. >>>> CC'ed Eli Bendersky and ?ukasz Langa as humans who understand Russian >>>> well enough to be witness for my words. > > Did anything come of this? There are now a few more threads on > python-ideas that are almost pure Anatoly-instigated noise :P > I got reply from Anatoly. Short summary is: 1. He don't want to sign Licence Agreement by some reasons (not clean to me. Looks like his objections are not showstopper for every another contributor). 2. He don't want to work on patches due lack of free time/interest and not enough experience level. 3. He like to protect hard his opinion unless 100% sure he is wrong. and 4. He want to be helpful for Python and community Looks like points 1-3 are opposite to point 4 :) > I'm well and truly to the point of caring far more about the feelings > of people who get frustrated trying to deal with his obtuseness > (whether that arises deliberately or through genuine cluelessness) > than I care about his feelings. He has the entire internet to play on, > we don't have to allow him access to python.org controlled resources. > > Regards, > Nick. > > -- > Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia -- Thanks, Andrew Svetlov From dickinsm at gmail.com Tue Dec 25 17:38:31 2012 From: dickinsm at gmail.com (Mark Dickinson) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 16:38:31 +0000 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Trent Nelson wrote: > He's pretty active on IRC and the tracker. I haven't dealt with any > of his patches personally, but I know lots of others have. Thoughts? +1 from me. 'pretty active' is something of an understatement. :-) Mark From andrew.svetlov at gmail.com Tue Dec 25 17:51:34 2012 From: andrew.svetlov at gmail.com (Andrew Svetlov) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 18:51:34 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> Message-ID: +1. I committed a lot of Serhiy's patches. On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Mark Dickinson wrote: > On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Trent Nelson wrote: >> He's pretty active on IRC and the tracker. I haven't dealt with any >> of his patches personally, but I know lots of others have. Thoughts? > > +1 from me. 'pretty active' is something of an understatement. :-) > > Mark > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers -- Thanks, Andrew Svetlov From victor.stinner at gmail.com Tue Dec 25 23:26:46 2012 From: victor.stinner at gmail.com (Victor Stinner) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 23:26:46 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <50D9A3A7.5080009@python.org> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <50D9A3A7.5080009@python.org> Message-ID: Le mardi 25 d?cembre 2012, Christian Heimes a ?crit : > His attitude hasn't improved, too. For example in bug > http://bugs.python.org/issue16689 he used an offensive title and > re-opened the ticket *twice* although it was closed by two different and > highly respectable core devs. > Oh, I missed that one. I worked on the previous issue: 16656. I wrote a long message to explain him that his issue is a Windows issue, it cannot be solved and using Unicode works correctly. I closed the issue but he reopened it quickly without trying to understand. He just ignored my message. He is very annoying. Victor -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chris.jerdonek at gmail.com Tue Dec 25 23:44:31 2012 From: chris.jerdonek at gmail.com (Chris Jerdonek) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 14:44:31 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 4:37 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Andrew Svetlov wrote: >> Let's wait a bit. >> >> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: >>> From his response to me he seems to be unaware that there is a problem... >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Andrew Svetlov >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I've sent email to Anatoly in Russian describing current situation. >>>> CC'ed Eli Bendersky and ?ukasz Langa as humans who understand Russian >>>> well enough to be witness for my words. > > Did anything come of this? There are now a few more threads on > python-ideas that are almost pure Anatoly-instigated noise :P Back in November, I had asked if anyone had ever given him an official/explicit warning that he would be kicked out if he continued certain behavior, and it didn't seem that anyone had ever had. Out of curiosity, has that been done since then? I think it is good practice to issue a warning before kicking someone out. --Chris From eliben at gmail.com Tue Dec 25 23:51:12 2012 From: eliben at gmail.com (Eli Bendersky) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 14:51:12 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> Message-ID: > > Did anything come of this? There are now a few more threads on > > python-ideas that are almost pure Anatoly-instigated noise :P > > Back in November, I had asked if anyone had ever given him an > official/explicit warning that he would be kicked out if he continued > certain behavior, and it didn't seem that anyone had ever had. Out of > curiosity, has that been done since then? I think it is good practice > to issue a warning before kicking someone out. > I'd say that the email sent by Andrew Svetlov certainly counts as a warning. I also recall Guido mentioned he'll speak with Anatoly over Skype. Eli -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chris.jerdonek at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 00:06:48 2012 From: chris.jerdonek at gmail.com (Chris Jerdonek) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 15:06:48 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Eli Bendersky wrote: > >> > Did anything come of this? There are now a few more threads on >> > python-ideas that are almost pure Anatoly-instigated noise :P >> >> Back in November, I had asked if anyone had ever given him an >> official/explicit warning that he would be kicked out if he continued >> certain behavior, and it didn't seem that anyone had ever had. Out of >> curiosity, has that been done since then? I think it is good practice >> to issue a warning before kicking someone out. > > > I'd say that the email sent by Andrew Svetlov certainly counts as a warning. > I also recall Guido mentioned he'll speak with Anatoly over Skype. Then I guess I'm asking if he was explicitly warned in either that e-mail or Skype conversation. You can tell someone, "people don't like your behavior" without saying "we will kick you off if you continue." One states the consequence. --Chris From tjreedy at udel.edu Wed Dec 26 00:10:33 2012 From: tjreedy at udel.edu (Terry Reedy) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 18:10:33 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> Message-ID: <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> On 12/25/2012 11:51 AM, Andrew Svetlov wrote: > On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Mark Dickinson wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Trent Nelson wrote: >>> He's pretty active on IRC and the tracker. I haven't dealt with any >>> of his patches personally, but I know lots of others have. Thoughts? >> >> +1 from me. 'pretty active' is something of an understatement. :-) I believe he was offered push privileges before and declined because of a +-0 vote and personal preferences. I can imagine any of 1) he is nervous about making a mistake (I was); 2) he does not like the mechanics of hg commit and push; 3) he loves writing patches, even of the type that many of us would find tedious. I think he should be reminded that he can have push access when he wants it, but not pushed hard to accept it ;-). > +1. I committed a lot of Serhiy's patches. You two have been extremely productive, and you end up with more than half the credit. Are you willing to continue? Terry From lukasz at langa.pl Tue Dec 25 23:56:55 2012 From: lukasz at langa.pl (=?utf-8?Q?=C5=81ukasz_Langa?=) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 23:56:55 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> Message-ID: <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> Dnia 25 gru 2012 o godz. 13:37 Nick Coghlan napisa?(a): > I'm well and truly to the point of caring far more about the feelings > of people who get frustrated trying to deal with his obtuseness > (whether that arises deliberately or through genuine cluelessness) > than I care about his feelings. He has the entire internet to play on, > we don't have to allow him access to python.org controlled resources. +1 I opened this thread so I feel somewhat responsible to carry this out to finish. Give me a day or two to contemplate on how to achieve the following: 1. Communicate what happened clearly and openly to our community. 2. Communicate to Anatoly the decision to cut him off. 3. Arrange for feasible technological ways to execute the ban on python.org resources, preparing also for vengeful action (which given the history is unfortunately likely). 4. Prepare for rectifying unjust PR by the banned person, etc. I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if only for transparency reasons. What do you think? I feel very bad that it has come to this but I strongly believe this is necessary to protect us as a community. From andrew.svetlov at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 01:11:44 2012 From: andrew.svetlov at gmail.com (Andrew Svetlov) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 02:11:44 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Terry Reedy wrote: > You two have been extremely productive, and you end up with more than half > the credit. Are you willing to continue? Sure, will do! -- Thanks, Andrew Svetlov From tjreedy at udel.edu Wed Dec 26 00:31:26 2012 From: tjreedy at udel.edu (Terry Reedy) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 18:31:26 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <50D9A3A7.5080009@python.org> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <50D9A3A7.5080009@python.org> Message-ID: <50DA374E.9070208@udel.edu> On 12/25/2012 8:01 AM, Christian Heimes wrote: > Am 25.12.2012 13:37, schrieb Nick Coghlan: >> I'm well and truly to the point of caring far more about the feelings >> of people who get frustrated trying to deal with his obtuseness >> (whether that arises deliberately or through genuine cluelessness) I believe it is cluelessness mixed with an idiosyncratic nacissistic obstinacy that seems to block him from learning. I no longer take anything he says personally. >> than I care about his feelings. He has the entire internet to play on, >> we don't have to allow him access to python.org controlled resources. I personally see his signal-noise ratio as about 1/2, but can understand if others put it lower (though still above 0/infinity). The issue Christian mentions below was at most 1/10. On the other hand, another recent issue was close to 1/1 and lead to a doc patch. > He is so far beyond the point of political correctness and > respectability that I'm unable to find any words for his behavior in my > dictionary. His attitude hasn't improved, too. For example in bug > http://bugs.python.org/issue16689 he used an offensive title and > re-opened the ticket *twice* although it was closed by two different and > highly respectable core devs. > > I hate to kick out people but I see no other way to deal with the issue > anymore. :( The third close message said clearly 'Do not reopen again.'. If he ignores that, then I think his tracker access should be suspended for at least a month. (IE, I think that message constituted 'warning'.) Terry Jan Reedy From brian at python.org Wed Dec 26 03:20:14 2012 From: brian at python.org (Brian Curtin) Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 20:20:14 -0600 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 4:56 PM, ?ukasz Langa wrote: > Dnia 25 gru 2012 o godz. 13:37 Nick Coghlan napisa?(a): > >> I'm well and truly to the point of caring far more about the feelings >> of people who get frustrated trying to deal with his obtuseness >> (whether that arises deliberately or through genuine cluelessness) >> than I care about his feelings. He has the entire internet to play on, >> we don't have to allow him access to python.org controlled resources. > > +1 > > I opened this thread so I feel somewhat responsible to carry this out to finish. Give me a day or two to contemplate on how to achieve the following: > > 1. Communicate what happened clearly and openly to our community. > > 2. Communicate to Anatoly the decision to cut him off. > > 3. Arrange for feasible technological ways to execute the ban on python.org resources, preparing also for vengeful action (which given the history is unfortunately likely). > > 4. Prepare for rectifying unjust PR by the banned person, etc. > > I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if only for transparency reasons. > > What do you think? > > I feel very bad that it has come to this but I strongly believe this is necessary to protect us as a community. I think #2 is going to be hard to safely write if you intend to send it to python-dev addressed to Anatoly (which I got from #1). The shorter the better is my tip. I'm available to review/bikeshed about this email if you intend to write it. Also, please only post this to one list, preferably -dev and not -ideas. #3 can be handled pretty swiftly since the appropriate people are all involved in this conversation. On #4, whatever you do, please don't get involved in some back-and-forth post war and don't go around Reddit trying to further justify anything. If people talk, and they will, let them. Please don't write this up in a PEP. We're getting flak from all directions for code of conduct things on the PyCon/PSF side of things, and that's along the lines of what this would be. I actually do have some ideas in that area, but that's for another list and another time. This should just be an email. From tjreedy at udel.edu Wed Dec 26 08:36:08 2012 From: tjreedy at udel.edu (Terry Reedy) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 02:36:08 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> Message-ID: <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> This is a continuation of my answer to Christian On 12/25/2012 5:56 PM, ?ukasz Langa wrote: > Dnia 25 gru 2012 o godz. 13:37 Nick Coghlan > napisa?(a): > >> I'm well and truly to the point of caring far more about the >> feelings of people who get frustrated trying to deal with his >> obtuseness (whether that arises deliberately or through genuine >> cluelessness) than I care about his feelings. He has the entire >> internet to play on, we don't have to allow him access to >> python.org controlled resources. > > +1 > > I opened this thread so I feel somewhat responsible to carry this out > to finish. Give me a day or two to contemplate on how to achieve the > following: Please do wait. Contemplation and sleep can work wonders. > 1. Communicate what happened clearly and openly to our community. I am not sure how broadly you mean 'our community', but please no. Nothing need or should be said beyond this list. (Unless Anatoly says something elsewhere -- but let him be the first. Spam accounts and messages on the tracker are routinely cancelled without notice. The one time I know of that a contributor was banned (suspended, actually, soon followed by an offer of re-instatement without admin privileges), it was pretty much handled privately (though I would have preferred notice on this list first). > 2. Communicate to Anatoly the decision to cut him off. I think any cut-off should be in stages: tracker, pydev, python-ideas. Anything beyond the tracker should be approved by Guido. As far as the tracker goes, I think it should be clearly communicated to him and everyone in plain English (and specified in the user guide if not already) that a) the purpose of the tracker is to help committers receive reports, communicate with reporters and others, and to manage issues, and b) after an initial report, the administrative fields are mostly intended for the use of tracker administrators, including committers. The only reason a submitter can edit the status field is so that they can close an issue to withdraw it (possible after review). If we can enforce that in the database (only admins (or possibly only committers) but not the submitter can reopen), I think we should! That would eliminate bogus reopenings by anyone, not just Anatoly. I say this because he specifically justified his re-open action on the basis that *he* also uses the tracker to track issues. So he does not quite understand what it is for. As I said in my previous post, if he reopens a third time, act. He has not yet that I have seen. I also notice that he just 'voted' to reopen http://bugs.python.org/issue7083 but did not do so himself (possible because he cannot). Going a bit further, I actually would not let a non-admin submitter edit any field as long as an issue is closed. I see this as a sensible refinement of the database policy based on years of experience and not directly specifically at Anatoly. Another tweak based on experience would be that only committers can set version to security issues. I routinely unset 2.6 and 3.1 with a short explanation. Better that the ignorant cannot even make that mistake (I know, submit to the metatracker.) > 3. Arrange for feasible technological ways to execute the ban on > python.org resources, See the suggestion above for the tracker. I presume that the mailing list software can reject specific users and the the gmane is or can be set up to honor rejections. But if that have ever been done, it has been done so privately that I am not aware of it. I would ban from pydev before I would ban from python-ideas. The latter is intended to be a bit more open to off-the-wall posts. I do not see that Anatoly has really abused python-ideas. His post today has 16 responses from other people and only 1 from him. People could have just ignored him after 1 response. Another technological fix: enforce no cross-posting to peps editors list and anything else by rejecting cross-posted messages, both at the editors list and all other python.org lists. My theme with all these suggestions is that making mis-behavior impossible, when possible, is preferable to scolding and banning. Pushes to the repository by unauthorized people are just rejected. If anyone were to complain publicly about such rejection, they would just be laughed at. > preparing also for vengeful action (which given > the history is unfortunately likely). Shaming anyone publicly is more likely to get such action, and would almost make it justified in my view. > 4. Prepare for rectifying unjust PR by the banned person, etc. Better to not unnecessarily provoke it, and worry about it when it actually happens. For months, Jim Fauth (sp?) has repeatedly trashed 3.3 on python-list to the point of telling people not to use it, and implicitly slandered us developers, because he hates the new Unicode implementation (it is 'unfair' because some people benefit more than others). I find Jim more annoying than Anatoly because unlike Anatoly, he does not acknowledge contrary facts or answer questions but just repeats the same stupid or irrational generalizations that are based on one fact. The one fact is that str.find, and hence str.replace, is much slower in 3.3 than 3.2. Because of his report of that fact, there is an issue on the tracker. Jim will not even acknowledge that he did get an issue opened because *that* fact undercuts his narrative about our indifference. Anyway: 1. I find Jim *much* more annoying and destructive than Anatoly. (This is possibly one reason Anatoly, by comparison, does not bother me as much as others). 2. The response on python-list is that one or more regulars (sometimes me, often others) responds to each repetition, more of less politely and rationally, as the spirit moves us. If you are worried about bad PR, driving Anatoly to become like Jim on python-list would be the wrong thing to do. > I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely > without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the > future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if > only for transparency reasons. This strike me as over-reaction. -- Terry Jan Reedy From g.brandl at gmx.net Wed Dec 26 10:07:03 2012 From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:07:03 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: FWIW, I agree 100% with Terry here. I'm certainly annoyed by many of Anatoly's contributions, and find myself extremely unwilling to do anything about his perceived issues, but to exclude a community member publicly (!) from all (!) python.org resources is going too far IMO. Individual policy violations can and should of course be sanctioned. cheers, Georg On 12/26/2012 08:36 AM, Terry Reedy wrote: > This is a continuation of my answer to Christian > > On 12/25/2012 5:56 PM, ?ukasz Langa wrote: >> Dnia 25 gru 2012 o godz. 13:37 Nick Coghlan >> napisa?(a): >> >>> I'm well and truly to the point of caring far more about the >>> feelings of people who get frustrated trying to deal with his >>> obtuseness (whether that arises deliberately or through genuine >>> cluelessness) than I care about his feelings. He has the entire >>> internet to play on, we don't have to allow him access to >>> python.org controlled resources. >> >> +1 >> >> I opened this thread so I feel somewhat responsible to carry this out >> to finish. Give me a day or two to contemplate on how to achieve the >> following: > > Please do wait. Contemplation and sleep can work wonders. > >> 1. Communicate what happened clearly and openly to our community. > > I am not sure how broadly you mean 'our community', but please no. > Nothing need or should be said beyond this list. (Unless Anatoly says > something elsewhere -- but let him be the first. > > Spam accounts and messages on the tracker are routinely cancelled > without notice. The one time I know of that a contributor was banned > (suspended, actually, soon followed by an offer of re-instatement > without admin privileges), it was pretty much handled privately (though > I would have preferred notice on this list first). > >> 2. Communicate to Anatoly the decision to cut him off. > > I think any cut-off should be in stages: tracker, pydev, python-ideas. > Anything beyond the tracker should be approved by Guido. > > As far as the tracker goes, I think it should be clearly communicated to > him and everyone in plain English (and specified in the user guide if > not already) that a) the purpose of the tracker is to help committers > receive reports, communicate with reporters and others, and to manage > issues, and b) after an initial report, the administrative fields are > mostly intended for the use of tracker administrators, including > committers. The only reason a submitter can edit the status field is so > that they can close an issue to withdraw it (possible after review). If > we can enforce that in the database (only admins (or possibly only > committers) but not the submitter can reopen), I think we should! That > would eliminate bogus reopenings by anyone, not just Anatoly. > > I say this because he specifically justified his re-open action on the > basis that *he* also uses the tracker to track issues. So he does not > quite understand what it is for. As I said in my previous post, if he > reopens a third time, act. He has not yet that I have seen. I also > notice that he just 'voted' to reopen http://bugs.python.org/issue7083 > but did not do so himself (possible because he cannot). > > Going a bit further, I actually would not let a non-admin submitter edit > any field as long as an issue is closed. I see this as a sensible > refinement of the database policy based on years of experience and not > directly specifically at Anatoly. Another tweak based on experience > would be that only committers can set version to security issues. I > routinely unset 2.6 and 3.1 with a short explanation. Better that the > ignorant cannot even make that mistake (I know, submit to the metatracker.) > >> 3. Arrange for feasible technological ways to execute the ban on > > python.org resources, > > See the suggestion above for the tracker. I presume that the mailing > list software can reject specific users and the the gmane is or can be > set up to honor rejections. But if that have ever been done, it has been > done so privately that I am not aware of it. I would ban from pydev > before I would ban from python-ideas. The latter is intended to be a bit > more open to off-the-wall posts. I do not see that Anatoly has really > abused python-ideas. His post today has 16 responses from other people > and only 1 from him. People could have just ignored him after 1 response. > > Another technological fix: enforce no cross-posting to peps editors list > and anything else by rejecting cross-posted messages, both at the > editors list and all other python.org lists. My theme with all these > suggestions is that making mis-behavior impossible, when possible, is > preferable to scolding and banning. Pushes to the repository by > unauthorized people are just rejected. If anyone were to complain > publicly about such rejection, they would just be laughed at. > > > preparing also for vengeful action (which given >> the history is unfortunately likely). > > Shaming anyone publicly is more likely to get such action, and would > almost make it justified in my view. > >> 4. Prepare for rectifying unjust PR by the banned person, etc. > > Better to not unnecessarily provoke it, and worry about it when it > actually happens. > > For months, Jim Fauth (sp?) has repeatedly trashed 3.3 on python-list to > the point of telling people not to use it, and implicitly slandered us > developers, because he hates the new Unicode implementation (it is > 'unfair' because some people benefit more than others). I find Jim more > annoying than Anatoly because unlike Anatoly, he does not acknowledge > contrary facts or answer questions but just repeats the same stupid or > irrational generalizations that are based on one fact. > > The one fact is that str.find, and hence str.replace, is much slower in > 3.3 than 3.2. Because of his report of that fact, there is an issue on > the tracker. Jim will not even acknowledge that he did get an issue > opened because *that* fact undercuts his narrative about our indifference. > > Anyway: > 1. I find Jim *much* more annoying and destructive than Anatoly. (This > is possibly one reason Anatoly, by comparison, does not bother me as > much as others). > 2. The response on python-list is that one or more regulars (sometimes > me, often others) responds to each repetition, more of less politely and > rationally, as the spirit moves us. If you are worried about bad PR, > driving Anatoly to become like Jim on python-list would be the wrong > thing to do. > >> I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely >> without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the >> future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if >> only for transparency reasons. > > This strike me as over-reaction. > > -- > Terry Jan Reedy > > > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > From chris.jerdonek at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 11:33:32 2012 From: chris.jerdonek at gmail.com (Chris Jerdonek) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 02:33:32 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 11:36 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > This is a continuation of my answer to Christian > > > On 12/25/2012 5:56 PM, ?ukasz Langa wrote: >> >> Dnia 25 gru 2012 o godz. 13:37 Nick Coghlan >> napisa?(a): >> >>> I'm well and truly to the point of caring far more about the >>> feelings of people who get frustrated trying to deal with his >>> obtuseness (whether that arises deliberately or through genuine >>> cluelessness) than I care about his feelings. He has the entire >>> internet to play on, we don't have to allow him access to >>> python.org controlled resources. >> >> >> +1 >> >> I opened this thread so I feel somewhat responsible to carry this out >> to finish. Give me a day or two to contemplate on how to achieve the >> following: > > > Please do wait. Contemplation and sleep can work wonders. > > >> 1. Communicate what happened clearly and openly to our community. > > > I am not sure how broadly you mean 'our community', but please no. Nothing > need or should be said beyond this list. (Unless Anatoly says something > elsewhere -- but let him be the first. At the risk of stating something that I imagine everyone already knows, this list is itself publicly viewable: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers So in some sense what we write here is already being said beyond this list (though not actively). For example, the thread we're engaging in right now is the second result when Googling "python anatoly". I guess my point is that what's going on is already pretty open to the outside (from a read-only perspective). --Chris From ncoghlan at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 11:36:23 2012 From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 20:36:23 +1000 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Georg Brandl wrote: > FWIW, I agree 100% with Terry here. I'm certainly annoyed by many of Anatoly's > contributions, and find myself extremely unwilling to do anything about his > perceived issues, but to exclude a community member publicly (!) from all (!) > python.org resources is going too far IMO. Individual policy violations can and > should of course be sanctioned. The problem is the effect he has on other people. He's an energy drain: I see the "tektonik" on yet another python-ideas thread or tracker issue and just go "Ah, fuck it, I'm gonna go play a computer game intead" (or else I reply, and *then* go play a game). Even his pointless threads get replies because his vortex of cluelessness draws other people in and it becomes necessary to head off the stupidity before it becomes a huge sink for wasted effort. Energy drains that confine their efforts to python-list don't affect me personally, because I don't follow python-list at all (although I appreciate the efforts of those that *do* follow it and pass along any valid issues that are raised). Anatoly has independently found himself routed to /dev/null by multiple core developers (starting way back with the "you should all switch to using Google Wave because I prefer it" idiocy). He still has no clue what the tracker is for, what python-dev is for, what it means for an idea to be "pythonic", what is even remotely technically feasible for CPython, and unlike most people in that situation, he doesn't even have the courtesy to find his own piece of the internet to play in, instead spraying crap over CPython core development resources, forcing people to waste their time cleaning up after him. We've tried fucking hard to educate Anatoly, and help him become a productive contributor. It hasn't worked, and he continues to be a net productivity loss, whining about things that are just plain hard to fix (or are an inherent part of the language design), and making actual contributing volunteers feel bad about themselves and their work. We don't want to be mean to somebody who genuinely appears to be trying to help, but eventually we have to look at his net impact and say "keeping our productive volunteers happy is more important than trying to include someone who has demonstrated over an extended period of time that they lack the ability to collaborate effectively". At the very least, that means revoking tracker and python-dev posting privileges. I'd vote for cutting him off from python-ideas, too. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia From andrew.svetlov at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 13:59:36 2012 From: andrew.svetlov at gmail.com (Andrew Svetlov) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 14:59:36 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> Message-ID: I've asked Serhiy about commit access today by email. He want to be committer. He agree with getting review for any nontrivial patch before commit and will follow our rules (as he does it today). What is next step in getting privs? On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 2:11 AM, Andrew Svetlov wrote: > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Terry Reedy wrote: >> You two have been extremely productive, and you end up with more than half >> the credit. Are you willing to continue? > > Sure, will do! > > -- > Thanks, > Andrew Svetlov -- Thanks, Andrew Svetlov From ncoghlan at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 14:26:33 2012 From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 23:26:33 +1000 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > We don't want to be mean to somebody who genuinely appears to be > trying to help, but eventually we have to look at his net impact and > say "keeping our productive volunteers happy is more important than > trying to include someone who has demonstrated over an extended period > of time that they lack the ability to collaborate effectively". At the > very least, that means revoking tracker and python-dev posting > privileges. I'd vote for cutting him off from python-ideas, too. Something I've realised may not be obvious to everyone - the problem isn't low SNR per se (if you dig up some of my early postings to python-list and python-dev, you'll find a *lot* of noise, so me chastising new posters for low SNR would be the height of hypocrisy), as the fact that Anatoly's SNR hasn't improved over the years, despite core devs (and others) putting plenty of effort into trying to help him learn. The breaking point for me was when he recently declared that he was completely unrepentant about the fact that he repeatedly wastes other people's time by failing to do his research [1]: """It's too boring to live in a world of existing knowledge and expertise, and yes, I am not aware of any open collaboration stuff expertise. Any reading recommendations with concentrated knowledge that can fit my brain?""" FFS, it's the internet. Search engines exist. I, for one, am done spoon feeding him answers that are off topic for the core Python lists, and that he should be able to answer on his own (although I'll still reply to other people that reply to him). If we start with a suspension rather than a ban, that would also be fine by me. As others have noted, we've given *one* tracker suspension that I'm aware of and it seemed to work wonders. Regards, Nick. [1] http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2012-June/015304.html -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia From rdmurray at bitdance.com Wed Dec 26 14:28:23 2012 From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 08:28:23 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 02:36:08 -0500, Terry Reedy wrote: > This is a continuation of my answer to Christian > > On 12/25/2012 5:56 PM, ??ukasz Langa wrote: > > 1. Communicate what happened clearly and openly to our community. > > I am not sure how broadly you mean 'our community', but please no. > Nothing need or should be said beyond this list. (Unless Anatoly says > something elsewhere -- but let him be the first. > > Spam accounts and messages on the tracker are routinely cancelled > without notice. The one time I know of that a contributor was banned > (suspended, actually, soon followed by an offer of re-instatement > without admin privileges), it was pretty much handled privately (though > I would have preferred notice on this list first). And this "private action" had unintended negative consequences. I think anyone who wants to take action on Anatoly should go back and read the threads surrounding Breamorboy's tracker suspension and what happened afterward. I believe the conclusion was that in the future any such actions should be discussed publicly (at a minimum on this list, so we are covering that) before action was taken, but despite having been a principal in that mess I don't remember for sure. > > 2. Communicate to Anatoly the decision to cut him off. > > I think any cut-off should be in stages: tracker, pydev, python-ideas. > Anything beyond the tracker should be approved by Guido. I agree that incident specific actions are better than a broad ban. If Guido wants to take responsibility for any of it, that's fine, but I don't think we should put that burden on him automatically. My understanding is that he signed up to be language dictator, not community dictator. > As far as the tracker goes, I think it should be clearly communicated to > him and everyone in plain English (and specified in the user guide if > not already) that a) the purpose of the tracker is to help committers > receive reports, communicate with reporters and others, and to manage > issues, and b) after an initial report, the administrative fields are > mostly intended for the use of tracker administrators, including > committers. The only reason a submitter can edit the status field is so > that they can close an issue to withdraw it (possible after review). If > we can enforce that in the database (only admins (or possibly only > committers) but not the submitter can reopen), I think we should! That > would eliminate bogus reopenings by anyone, not just Anatoly. The tracker fields used to be more restrictive, and we have been gradually loosening them over time. With the exception of Anatoly, this has been a successful experiment, and I am reluctant to reverse that trend. I would hate to see one bad actor result in restrictions on everyone. > I say this because he specifically justified his re-open action on the > basis that *he* also uses the tracker to track issues. So he does not > quite understand what it is for. As I said in my previous post, if he > reopens a third time, act. He has not yet that I have seen. I also > notice that he just 'voted' to reopen http://bugs.python.org/issue7083 > but did not do so himself (possible because he cannot). > > Going a bit further, I actually would not let a non-admin submitter edit > any field as long as an issue is closed. I see this as a sensible > refinement of the database policy based on years of experience and not > directly specifically at Anatoly. Another tweak based on experience > would be that only committers can set version to security issues. I > routinely unset 2.6 and 3.1 with a short explanation. Better that the > ignorant cannot even make that mistake (I know, submit to the metatracker.) I have often told submitters in issues that I have closed that if they come back with more evidence or a patch they should reopen the issue. So again I would prefer not to restrict functionality because of one bad actor. > > preparing also for vengeful action (which given > > the history is unfortunately likely). > > Shaming anyone publicly is more likely to get such action, and would > almost make it justified in my view. Anatoly has been shaming us publicly for years. We would be much more polite and rational in any more-public statement made (I trust). We would still draw fire. That may or may not make us stronger in the long run...for it to do so we will, in fact, need to have a principled position to rest upon, and thus I think we would be well recommended to have something PEP-like in terms of a policy statement. I wonder if a public discussion aimed at developing such a policy would clue Anatoly in (probably not). I wonder what other communities have done. I know Python is one of the leaders in the COC matter, so perhaps we will have to be a leader here as well. This is not easy stuff. > > 4. Prepare for rectifying unjust PR by the banned person, etc. > > Better to not unnecessarily provoke it, and worry about it when it > actually happens. No, it is a good idea to be prepared. In fact, if the board is not already aware of this issue, they probably should be made aware. As Chris pointed out, we are already talking "in public" (as it should be, IMO). > > I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely > > without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the > > future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if > > only for transparency reasons. > > This strike me as over-reaction. I'm not at all sure that it is, but that "most likely" had better be replaced by "most certainly". Such a policy needs to rest on fundamental principles. "Bad cases make bad law", so one must be careful not to craft a policy to deal only with a specific egregious thing, but rather craft something that will serve well in the general cases. Specifically, any such policy, and any statement made if we take action on Anatoly, will have to address the inevitable calls that we are engaging in censorship. There are principled answers to that charge, but we must decide which of them we are following and why, and articulate that clearly and consistently. As an aside, it has occurred to me that the fundamental problem here is that we do not feel that Anatoly respects *us*. So it is no wonder that we are offended and do not respect him. --David From ncoghlan at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 14:30:59 2012 From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 23:30:59 +1000 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 10:59 PM, Andrew Svetlov wrote: > I've asked Serhiy about commit access today by email. > He want to be committer. > He agree with getting review for any nontrivial patch before commit > and will follow our rules (as he does it today). > > What is next step in getting privs? Run through the sections here: http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges The main one is for Serhiy to send an email with his public SSH key to hgaccounts at python.org (I believe the folks on that list are also tracker admins) and set himself up with a read/write clone. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia From brian at python.org Wed Dec 26 15:00:01 2012 From: brian at python.org (Brian Curtin) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 08:00:01 -0600 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 7:28 AM, R. David Murray wrote: > Anatoly has been shaming us publicly for years. We would be much more > polite and rational in any more-public statement made (I trust). We > would still draw fire. That may or may not make us stronger in the > long run...for it to do so we will, in fact, need to have a principled > position to rest upon, and thus I think we would be well recommended > to have something PEP-like in terms of a policy statement. > > I wonder if a public discussion aimed at developing such a policy > would clue Anatoly in (probably not). I wonder what other communities > have done. I know Python is one of the leaders in the COC matter, > so perhaps we will have to be a leader here as well. > > This is not easy stuff. Any such CoC or policy should probably apply to all python.org mailing lists, and bolting one after things like -dev/ideas/list have been around for so long is going to be a hard task to get right. I do think something along the lines of a CoC is a good thing here, but I think it's much larger than python-dev and probably shouldn't be implemented as the result of or as a reaction to one person. I think it'd probably be a PSF-level thing to apply to python.org properties (a few discussions have kicked off, but nothing's more than an inch off the ground). I also think the process of creating a CoC that we don't immediately get burned at the stake for could take a long time to create and implement. I don't think we should have to put up with Anatoly while that process gets kicked around. From ezio.melotti at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 15:09:44 2012 From: ezio.melotti at gmail.com (Ezio Melotti) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 16:09:44 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: Hi, On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Georg Brandl wrote: > FWIW, I agree 100% with Terry here. I'm certainly annoyed by many of > Anatoly's > contributions, and find myself extremely unwilling to do anything about his > perceived issues, but to exclude a community member publicly (!) from all > (!) > python.org resources is going too far IMO. Individual policy violations > can and > should of course be sanctioned. > > I also agree with Terry and Georg. I don't think anyone should be banned from the tracker or from the MLs unless their actions are intentionally destructive (e.g. flooders/spammers). This is not the case for anatoly, so in my opinion we should not take this kind of action against him. While I mostly lurk on python-dev/ideas, I interacted with him several times on the bug and meta trackers, rejecting/closing a number of suggestions/issues and accepting a few others. I did so merely on the value of the suggestion itself, and I can really easily ignore the tone of the message (e.g. frustrated, angry). That said, ISTM that the main problem is that the way he communicates is not really effective and that results in an "energy drain" for other people. This can be addressed on both the sides. The community should ignore the tone of the messages or even the messages themselves and most importantly avoid replies that convey the same negative feelings. People should be able to recognize when a discussion is not constructive anymore and leave it, rather than wasting time just to prove a point or to repeat themselves. (Note that this apply to everyone, and not to anatoly in particular). Regarding the effectiveness of the communications there's certainty room for improvement, but apparently the previous attempts to address the problem were unsuccessful. I'm willing to make an attempt myself, as I think I have a quite clear idea of the problem. Best Regards, Ezio Melotti cheers, > Georg > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brian at python.org Wed Dec 26 15:18:14 2012 From: brian at python.org (Brian Curtin) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 08:18:14 -0600 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Ezio Melotti wrote: > That said, ISTM that the main problem is that the way he communicates is not > really effective and that results in an "energy drain" for other people. > This can be addressed on both the sides. > The community should ignore the tone of the messages or even the messages > themselves and most importantly avoid replies that convey the same negative > feelings. I've filtered his emails to the trash for almost two years now, but I'm not going to ignore that he's now discouraging my friends and colleagues from contribution. I already removed myself from the nosy list on a bunch of issues he created in the past, and the people who were willing to work with him are dropping off. I also will not ignore his tone about a GSoC contribution being useless. > People should be able to recognize when a discussion is not > constructive anymore and leave it, rather than wasting time just to prove a > point or to repeat themselves. (Note that this apply to everyone, and not > to anatoly in particular). > Regarding the effectiveness of the communications there's certainty room for > improvement, but apparently the previous attempts to address the problem > were unsuccessful. I'm willing to make an attempt myself, as I think I have > a quite clear idea of the problem. You're wasting your time if you think you will be the one to break through to him after several people have already talked to him. Apparently he even got on Skype with Guido about this. People would *pay* to have that chance. Anatoly got it for being a jerk and it changed nothing. From ncoghlan at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 15:29:13 2012 From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan) Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 00:29:13 +1000 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 11:28 PM, R. David Murray wrote: > As an aside, it has occurred to me that the fundamental problem here is > that we do not feel that Anatoly respects *us*. So it is no wonder that > we are offended and do not respect him. Agreed. Being a welcoming community means *defaulting* to respect and giving people the benefit of the doubt. We ultimately created core-mentorship + python-ideas + python-dev as separate lists to provide people with an on-ramp to involvement, and we gently redirect posters to more appropriate locations. In the vast majority of cases, that gentle redirection has been completely sufficient - posters to the wrong list get the hint, switch to the correct list and (hopefully) receive more useful answers there. The problem that has arisen is what to do with people like Anatoly that expect the core developers to abide by *their* wishes, rather than accept that the development team has already established norms that they need to follow. Leaving it up to individuals to place people on email auto-ignore lists is avoiding the problem rather than resolving it, and clearly doesn't work for other shared resources like the tracker and the wiki. While it feels easier to let things run like that, because nobody wants to be the bad guy and say "look, we know you're trying to help, but please, just stop", in the long term it's bad because of the toll it takes on the people that actually *are* helping. However, I also agree with David that we'd like guidelines a little more objective than "congratulations, your behaviour has convinced almost all the core developers that have tried to deal with you extensively to start deleting your emails without reading them because you're almost certainly going to be wasting their time". Regards, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia From lukasz at langa.pl Wed Dec 26 16:07:30 2012 From: lukasz at langa.pl (=?utf-8?Q?=C5=81ukasz_Langa?=) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 16:07:30 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: Dnia 26 gru 2012 o godz. 15:09 Ezio Melotti napisa?(a): > The community should ignore the tone of the messages or even the messages themselves and most importantly avoid replies that convey the same negative feelings. People should be able to recognize when a discussion is not constructive anymore and leave it, rather than wasting time just to prove a point or to repeat themselves. The problem I see with that suggestion is that in reality we have to work with what we have, not with what we think we should have. I don't want to spell out names but I've had more than one discussion at conferences this year with people _afraid_ to get involved with core development on the base of having to deal with behaviour like this. In one case the comment was simply "I don't have time to deal with [people] like him." The other case was sadder though: "Looks like you core devs have trouble dealing with criticism, as shown by Anatoly." We strive to be a welcoming bunch and I'm convinced that a part of this is to call out anti-social behaviour and stop it. Otherwise our playground stops looking like a fun and safe place to contribute. This is not elitism nor censorship but a simple manner of respecting each other. Think: out of respect for Guido's (or other senior devs') time we should put an end to this. Judging from the YouTube view count, humanity has spent over 3000 years watching Gangnam Style. How much time did humanity spend on this thread and all other non-constructive threads/issues fired by Anatoly? -- Best regards, ?ukasz Langa From andrew.svetlov at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 16:36:46 2012 From: andrew.svetlov at gmail.com (Andrew Svetlov) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:36:46 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > Run through the sections here: > http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges > > The main one is for Serhiy to send an email with his public SSH key to > hgaccounts at python.org (I believe the folks on that list are also > tracker admins) and set himself up with a read/write clone. http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges at start says something about ?an official offer to become a Python core developer?. Who have to send this letter and do we need to wait some time for getting possible objections from any developers? -- Thanks, Andrew Svetlov From ronaldoussoren at mac.com Wed Dec 26 16:47:22 2012 From: ronaldoussoren at mac.com (Ronald Oussoren) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 16:47:22 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> Message-ID: On 26 Dec, 2012, at 16:36, Andrew Svetlov wrote: > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> Run through the sections here: >> http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges >> >> The main one is for Serhiy to send an email with his public SSH key to >> hgaccounts at python.org (I believe the folks on that list are also >> tracker admins) and set himself up with a read/write clone. > > http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges > at start says something about ?an official offer to become a Python > core developer?. > > Who have to send this letter and do we need to wait some time for > getting possible objections from any developers? You've already done this step, the offer is that one of the existing core developers asks a potential new core developer if he (or she) is interested in becominging one (after asking here if there are any objections). Ronald > > -- > Thanks, > Andrew Svetlov > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers From rdmurray at bitdance.com Wed Dec 26 16:47:42 2012 From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:47:42 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> Message-ID: <20121226154743.754032500B6@webabinitio.net> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:36:46 +0200, Andrew Svetlov wrote: > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > Run through the sections here: > > http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges > > > > The main one is for Serhiy to send an email with his public SSH key to > > hgaccounts at python.org (I believe the folks on that list are also > > tracker admins) and set himself up with a read/write clone. > > http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges > at start says something about ??an official offer to become a Python > core developer??. > > Who have to send this letter and do we need to wait some time for > getting possible objections from any developers? Consensus on this list is as official as it gets, and we've already allowed plenty of time for people to express objections. So the email asking him if he wanted to become a committer was the official offer :) --David From andrew.svetlov at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 17:02:47 2012 From: andrew.svetlov at gmail.com (Andrew Svetlov) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 18:02:47 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: <20121226154743.754032500B6@webabinitio.net> References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> <20121226154743.754032500B6@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: Ok. Thanks. Sent to Serhiy link to instructions for next steps (http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges) as Nick suggested. On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:47 PM, R. David Murray wrote: > On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:36:46 +0200, Andrew Svetlov wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> > Run through the sections here: >> > http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges >> > >> > The main one is for Serhiy to send an email with his public SSH key to >> > hgaccounts at python.org (I believe the folks on that list are also >> > tracker admins) and set himself up with a read/write clone. >> >> http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges >> at start says something about ?an official offer to become a Python >> core developer?. >> >> Who have to send this letter and do we need to wait some time for >> getting possible objections from any developers? > > Consensus on this list is as official as it gets, and we've already > allowed plenty of time for people to express objections. So the > email asking him if he wanted to become a committer was the official > offer :) > > --David > > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > -- Thanks, Andrew Svetlov From eliben at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 17:08:23 2012 From: eliben at gmail.com (Eli Bendersky) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 08:08:23 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: At the risk of stating something that I imagine everyone already > knows, this list is itself publicly viewable: > > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > > So in some sense what we write here is already being said beyond this > list (though not actively). For example, the thread we're engaging in > right now is the second result when Googling "python anatoly". > > I guess my point is that what's going on is already pretty open to the > outside (from a read-only perspective). > > Ouch, this is important to keep in mind. Thanks for the reminder, Chris. This may be a different discussion altogether, but I'm pretty sure that sometimes people write to this list assuming it's private to committers only. Should it be? Eli -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ezio.melotti at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 17:20:06 2012 From: ezio.melotti at gmail.com (Ezio Melotti) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 18:20:06 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:07 PM, ?ukasz Langa wrote: > Dnia 26 gru 2012 o godz. 15:09 Ezio Melotti > napisa?(a): > > > The community should ignore the tone of the messages or even the > messages themselves and most importantly avoid replies that convey the same > negative feelings. People should be able to recognize when a discussion is > not constructive anymore and leave it, rather than wasting time just to > prove a point or to repeat themselves. > > > The problem I see with that suggestion is that in reality we have to work > with what we have, not with what we think we should have. > > I don't want to spell out names but I've had more than one discussion at > conferences this year with people _afraid_ to get involved with core > development on the base of having to deal with behaviour like this. In one > case the comment was simply "I don't have time to deal with [people] like > him." This is somewhat surprising to me. Why would they have to deal with him? If the "people like him" were the core developers I could understand the problem, but he is just one of the many contributors. > The other case was sadder though: "Looks like you core devs have trouble > dealing with criticism, as shown by Anatoly." > > I'm not sure I understand this. ISTM that the problem here is with core devs, that are unable to deal with criticism (and have to resort to bans ;) rather than with him. > We strive to be a welcoming bunch and I'm convinced that a part of this is > to call out anti-social behaviour and stop it. Otherwise our playground > stops looking like a fun and safe place to contribute. > > And a side effect of being welcoming is that you get every kind of people. Different people have different behaviors and skills. I don't think his lack of social skills is worse than e.g. the lack of English skills of some of the contributors. In both cases the intentions are not bad, but the message might be difficult to understand and thus can be misunderstood. These people shouldn't be marginalized just because of their lack of skills. As an example, I recently found out that one contributor on the tracker that sounded somewhat annoying actually was a ~10 years old kid. From that point of view his contributions went from somewhat annoying to quite impressive (and I think some of his patches have been committed too). Of course if people have an intentionally destructive behavior they can be stopped. > This is not elitism nor censorship but a simple manner of respecting each > other. Think: out of respect for Guido's (or other senior devs') time I heard this argument several time, but I'm not sure it's a really strong one. No one is forced to spend his time in any specific way. Granted, as a contributor you end up spending some of your time for this kind of things as well, but that also includes skimming through mails/comments that you don't care about, tell people that they wrote to wrong ML, that the issue they reported is invalid and so on. If people spend time reading his messages and responding to him, I assume they have reasons to do it. If this turns out to be ineffective they should stop. > we should put an end to this. Judging from the YouTube view count, > humanity has spent over 3000 years watching Gangnam Style. How much time > did humanity spend on this thread and all other non-constructive > threads/issues fired by Anatoly? > > This is not necessarily non-constructive. We have identified a problem and we are discussing about the possible ways it can be solved, while learning how to deal with similar problem should they occur again in the future. Best Regards, Ezio Melotti P.S. I haven't seen Gangnam Style yet -- I'm too busy tweaking rst markup in the docs :) > --e.g. > Best regards, > ?ukasz Langa > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brian at python.org Wed Dec 26 17:38:34 2012 From: brian at python.org (Brian Curtin) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:38:34 -0600 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Ezio Melotti wrote: > And a side effect of being welcoming is that you get every kind of people. > Different people have different behaviors and skills. I don't think his > lack of social skills is worse than e.g. the lack of English skills of some > of the contributors. In both cases the intentions are not bad, but the > message might be difficult to understand and thus can be misunderstood. > These people shouldn't be marginalized just because of their lack of skills. Now we're just trying to marginalize abuse. There is no lack of skills that is causing this, and it's not any sort of misunderstanding. Nick has presented numerous examples of this. From guido at python.org Wed Dec 26 17:45:38 2012 From: guido at python.org (Guido van Rossum) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 08:45:38 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: No, I never got on Skype with Anatoly. I did write a very frank email and got the usual response. I don't think I am up to doing anything more about him. He doesn't bother me that much, I ignore most of his threads. He is a reviewer and committer on Rietveld and behaves better there. --Guido On Wednesday, December 26, 2012, Brian Curtin wrote: > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Ezio Melotti > > wrote: > > That said, ISTM that the main problem is that the way he communicates is > not > > really effective and that results in an "energy drain" for other people. > > This can be addressed on both the sides. > > The community should ignore the tone of the messages or even the messages > > themselves and most importantly avoid replies that convey the same > negative > > feelings. > > I've filtered his emails to the trash for almost two years now, but > I'm not going to ignore that he's now discouraging my friends and > colleagues from contribution. I already removed myself from the nosy > list on a bunch of issues he created in the past, and the people who > were willing to work with him are dropping off. I also will not ignore > his tone about a GSoC contribution being useless. > > > People should be able to recognize when a discussion is not > > constructive anymore and leave it, rather than wasting time just to > prove a > > point or to repeat themselves. (Note that this apply to everyone, and > not > > to anatoly in particular). > > Regarding the effectiveness of the communications there's certainty room > for > > improvement, but apparently the previous attempts to address the problem > > were unsuccessful. I'm willing to make an attempt myself, as I think I > have > > a quite clear idea of the problem. > > You're wasting your time if you think you will be the one to break > through to him after several people have already talked to him. > Apparently he even got on Skype with Guido about this. People would > *pay* to have that chance. Anatoly got it for being a jerk and it > changed nothing. > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ncoghlan at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 17:53:49 2012 From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan) Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 02:53:49 +1000 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: People have the entire internet to abuse us (and they do). That's why I spend as much time as I do explaining *why* various things in Python are the way they are. However, we shouldn't have to put up with disrespectful bullshit on our own communication channels. Those are for us to collaborate on getting things done, not for Anatoly to whine incessantly about the world being something other than exactly the way *he* thinks it should be. And yes, putting off potential contributors by continuing to tolerate his poisonous behaviour is *definitely* something we should be worried about. Regards, Nick. -- Sent from my phone, thus the relative brevity :) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From solipsis at pitrou.net Wed Dec 26 17:54:01 2012 From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:54:01 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] privacy In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: <1356540841.3399.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Le mercredi 26 d?cembre 2012 ? 08:08 -0800, Eli Bendersky a ?crit : > At the risk of stating something that I imagine everyone already > knows, this list is itself publicly viewable: > > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > > So in some sense what we write here is already being said > beyond this > list (though not actively). For example, the thread we're > engaging in > right now is the second result when Googling "python anatoly". > > I guess my point is that what's going on is already pretty > open to the > outside (from a read-only perspective). > > > > Ouch, this is important to keep in mind. Thanks for the reminder, > Chris. > > This may be a different discussion altogether, but I'm pretty sure > that sometimes people write to this list assuming it's private to > committers only. Should it be? I personally think it is very sane for this list to be public. Regards Antoine. From ezio.melotti at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 17:56:54 2012 From: ezio.melotti at gmail.com (Ezio Melotti) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 18:56:54 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Brian Curtin wrote: > You're wasting your time if you think you will be the one to break > through to him after several people have already talked to him. > Apparently he even got on Skype with Guido about this. People would > *pay* to have that chance. Anatoly got it for being a jerk and it > changed nothing. > So, I contacted him and we chatted for about an hour. He said that he's been trying to pay more attention and improve his messages lately. We went through a list of problems and he was willing to listen (he actually seemed more polite than I expected). He also seemed somewhat frustrated by the fact that his messages are taken in a negative way, because he doesn't mean to be negative. I also went through his recent messages on the tracker to find "negative" examples but admittedly they mostly seem OK, so I wonder if "our" opinion towards him is already negatively biased and leads us to be less tolerant with him At the end he thanked me for bringing this up with him, and apparently he is willing to improve. Best Regards, Ezio Melotti -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From solipsis at pitrou.net Wed Dec 26 17:58:12 2012 From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:58:12 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: <1356541092.3399.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Hello, I agree with Brian and Nick. While I don't bother much with Anatoly anymore (I ignore at least 95% of his postings), I think it is not nice to let newcomers deal with the cognitive overhead of reading and appreciating his ramblings. That said he doesn't need to be banned from *all* of python.org. Each mailing-list can take individual action. And the justification needn't be verbose. A two-line public message saying "For the record, Anatoly Techtonik has been banned from this mailing-list after the request of numerous contributors" is enough. Regards Antoine. Le mercredi 26 d?cembre 2012 ? 08:18 -0600, Brian Curtin a ?crit : > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Ezio Melotti wrote: > > That said, ISTM that the main problem is that the way he communicates is not > > really effective and that results in an "energy drain" for other people. > > This can be addressed on both the sides. > > The community should ignore the tone of the messages or even the messages > > themselves and most importantly avoid replies that convey the same negative > > feelings. > > I've filtered his emails to the trash for almost two years now, but > I'm not going to ignore that he's now discouraging my friends and > colleagues from contribution. I already removed myself from the nosy > list on a bunch of issues he created in the past, and the people who > were willing to work with him are dropping off. I also will not ignore > his tone about a GSoC contribution being useless. > > > People should be able to recognize when a discussion is not > > constructive anymore and leave it, rather than wasting time just to prove a > > point or to repeat themselves. (Note that this apply to everyone, and not > > to anatoly in particular). > > Regarding the effectiveness of the communications there's certainty room for > > improvement, but apparently the previous attempts to address the problem > > were unsuccessful. I'm willing to make an attempt myself, as I think I have > > a quite clear idea of the problem. > > You're wasting your time if you think you will be the one to break > through to him after several people have already talked to him. > Apparently he even got on Skype with Guido about this. People would > *pay* to have that chance. Anatoly got it for being a jerk and it > changed nothing. > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > From eliben at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 18:17:37 2012 From: eliben at gmail.com (Eli Bendersky) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:17:37 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] privacy In-Reply-To: <1356540841.3399.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <1356540841.3399.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > Le mercredi 26 d?cembre 2012 ? 08:08 -0800, Eli Bendersky a ?crit : > > At the risk of stating something that I imagine everyone already > > knows, this list is itself publicly viewable: > > > > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > > > > So in some sense what we write here is already being said > > beyond this > > list (though not actively). For example, the thread we're > > engaging in > > right now is the second result when Googling "python anatoly". > > > > I guess my point is that what's going on is already pretty > > open to the > > outside (from a read-only perspective). > > > > > > > > Ouch, this is important to keep in mind. Thanks for the reminder, > > Chris. > > > > This may be a different discussion altogether, but I'm pretty sure > > that sometimes people write to this list assuming it's private to > > committers only. Should it be? > > I personally think it is very sane for this list to be public. > I agree there're very strong reasons to keep it public. I just wanted to emphasize Chris's note because I'm pretty sure that some devs assume it's not public when writing on controversial topics (like the recent conversation). Eli -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rdmurray at bitdance.com Wed Dec 26 18:37:50 2012 From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 12:37:50 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: <20121226173751.A614C2500B6@webabinitio.net> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 18:20:06 +0200, Ezio Melotti wrote: > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:07 PM, ??ukasz Langa wrote: > > I don't want to spell out names but I've had more than one discussion at > > conferences this year with people _afraid_ to get involved with core > > development on the base of having to deal with behaviour like this. In one > > case the comment was simply "I don't have time to deal with [people] like > > him." > > This is somewhat surprising to me. Why would they have to deal with him? > If the "people like him" were the core developers I could understand the > problem, but he is just one of the many contributors. Because, to put it in new age-y terms, his bad vibrations are poisoning the environment. That is perhaps a graphic way to put it, but it is a matter of community tone and nurturing a joyful and creative environment in which all are welcome and feel encouraged to contribute. Anatoly works against that, almost constantly. Encouraging him to support the community would be *much* better than banning him...but we've tried that. > > The other case was sadder though: "Looks like you core devs have trouble > > dealing with criticism, as shown by Anatoly." > > > I'm not sure I understand this. ISTM that the problem here is with core > devs, that are unable to deal with criticism (and have to resort to bans ;) > rather than with him. By "not understand", I presume you mean the "sadder" comment. It is not that we are *unable* to deal with criticism. We have dealt reasonably with every criticism he has leveled, I think. But his comments create the *perception* that we are not dealing well with criticism, because he is not but casts the aspersion onto us, while we do that much less frequently to him, but do occasionally lapse into returning tit for tat. Since we are perceived as the ones in the position of power, we get castigated for our actions and reactions much more than Anatoly, the one perceived to be powerless in the situation, ever will be. Let me repeat that bit, it is important. We are perceived as being the ones in the position of power, and he the powerless. That perception (and the reality behind it) will color every conversation that the wider community has about this issue. That is why I stress that our position and our actions have to come from well articulated principles, otherwise they will be perceived as caprice. Which, I think, is more or less why you are arguing we should not take action. However, dealing reasonably with him gets harder and harder over time. It is a failing in me as a person, but every time I see a message from Anatoly, my gut clenches up and I go into a defensive mode, and want to prove him wrong. So I have to master myself and try to speak reasonably, and try to not give back to him what he gives to us. I hope I'm getting better at that, but... Take issue 16781 as a recent example. I wanted to prove him wrong, both because of his past actions and because of my perception (probably colored by those past actions) of his choice of title for the issue ("execfile/exec messes up...") But there is a real (documentation) issue there. I managed to moderate my tone...almost. I still failed: I said "the fact that the print works should be a clue", implying that he should have seen it himself, But if I were dealing with anyone else, I would have said, "The fact that the print works is a clue..." This difference is *subtle*. But those subtleties are *important* in determining the tone of a community, the supportiveness of a community, the openness of a community, the inclusiveness of a community. Someone reading my comment on that bug without knowing Anatoly's history would think that the Python community is very stuck up. It is so easy to forget that our words to Anatoly are not read just by him, but by many many other people. Anatoly spreads negativity almost (but not every!) time he opens his mouth, negativity which is then compounded by our natural human reactions to his tone. Yes it would be great if we could all master ourselves and always speak to him reasonably no matter the provocation, and yes we absolutely should strive very hard for that goal. It should be one of our guiding principles as a community. But is that enough? Remember, the issue isn't just *us*, the issue is also the effect on people with whom we never interact directly, people who may flee the community, or not join it, because of the negativity produced by both sides. Full disclosure: despite arguing here for *doing something* about Anatoly, I am in fact somewhat ambivalent about what. I have no problem with banning him for specific actions (such as a ban from the tracker for repeatedly reopening an issue). But what, if any, other actions should be taken I am not clear on. > > We strive to be a welcoming bunch and I'm convinced that a part of this is > > to call out anti-social behaviour and stop it. Otherwise our playground > > stops looking like a fun and safe place to contribute. > > And a side effect of being welcoming is that you get every kind of people. > Different people have different behaviors and skills. I don't think his > lack of social skills is worse than e.g. the lack of English skills of some > of the contributors. In both cases the intentions are not bad, but the > message might be difficult to understand and thus can be misunderstood. > These people shouldn't be marginalized just because of their lack of skills. > As an example, I recently found out that one contributor on the tracker > that sounded somewhat annoying actually was a ~10 years old kid. From that > point of view his contributions went from somewhat annoying to quite > impressive (and I think some of his patches have been committed too). > Of course if people have an intentionally destructive behavior they can be > stopped. As Nick pointed out, the problem isn't who he was coming in to the Python community. The problem is that he hasn't learned to support the community instead of tear it down, after *years* of effort on the community's part. > > This is not elitism nor censorship but a simple manner of respecting each > > other. Think: out of respect for Guido's (or other senior devs') time > > I heard this argument several time, but I'm not sure it's a really strong > one. No one is forced to spend his time in any specific way. Granted, as > a contributor you end up spending some of your time for this kind of things > as well, but that also includes skimming through mails/comments that you > don't care about, tell people that they wrote to wrong ML, that the issue > they reported is invalid and so on. > If people spend time reading his messages and responding to him, I assume > they have reasons to do it. If this turns out to be ineffective they > should stop. The problem, again, is not the individual posts, but the effect on the community as a whole. If we don't deal with Anatoly in one way or another such that he is not having a bad effect on our community, then there are many many people whose lives will be worse off (including ours) because the community is *less* welcoming because of Anatoly's actions within it. (Note that this argument may apply in different degrees to different forums.) Please be clear that I am not saying his *criticisms* should be silenced. Far from it: if he treated our community with respect I think he would be a valuable contributor! > > we should put an end to this. Judging from the YouTube view count, > > humanity has spent over 3000 years watching Gangnam Style. How much time > > did humanity spend on this thread and all other non-constructive > > threads/issues fired by Anatoly? > > This is not necessarily non-constructive. We have identified a problem and > we are discussing about the possible ways it can be solved, while learning > how to deal with similar problem should they occur again in the future. Yes, this is a conversation that it a good thing to have, regardless of Anatoly. It is a discussion about who we as a community want to be in the world. A very valuable discussion, and one that should not and can not be confined just to this list. As Brian said, this is a long conversation. It is one that should never stop. But even this first part, getting clear on who we want to be right now, is not going to conclude in the next few days, or weeks, or even months. It actually started some time back, at least as long ago as the diversity list, and continuing through the CoC discussion. This is really just the next step in that process. --David From g.brandl at gmx.net Wed Dec 26 18:38:48 2012 From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 18:38:48 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> <20121226154743.754032500B6@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: The SSH key is added; tracker privileges were already given. Welcome Serhiy! Georg On 12/26/2012 05:02 PM, Andrew Svetlov wrote: > Ok. Thanks. > > Sent to Serhiy link to instructions for next steps > (http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges) > as Nick suggested. > > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:47 PM, R. David Murray wrote: >> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:36:46 +0200, Andrew Svetlov wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >>> > Run through the sections here: >>> > http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges >>> > >>> > The main one is for Serhiy to send an email with his public SSH key to >>> > hgaccounts at python.org (I believe the folks on that list are also >>> > tracker admins) and set himself up with a read/write clone. >>> >>> http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges >>> at start says something about ?an official offer to become a Python >>> core developer?. >>> >>> Who have to send this letter and do we need to wait some time for >>> getting possible objections from any developers? >> >> Consensus on this list is as official as it gets, and we've already >> allowed plenty of time for people to express objections. So the >> email asking him if he wanted to become a committer was the official >> offer :) >> >> --David >> >> _______________________________________________ >> python-committers mailing list >> python-committers at python.org >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers >> > > > From g.brandl at gmx.net Wed Dec 26 18:42:52 2012 From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 18:42:52 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] privacy In-Reply-To: References: <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <1356540841.3399.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On 12/26/2012 06:17 PM, Eli Bendersky wrote: > > At the risk of stating something that I imagine everyone already > > knows, this list is itself publicly viewable: > > > > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > > > > So in some sense what we write here is already being said > > beyond this > > list (though not actively). For example, the thread we're > > engaging in > > right now is the second result when Googling "python anatoly". > > > > I guess my point is that what's going on is already pretty > > open to the > > outside (from a read-only perspective). > > > > > > > > Ouch, this is important to keep in mind. Thanks for the reminder, > > Chris. > > > > This may be a different discussion altogether, but I'm pretty sure > > that sometimes people write to this list assuming it's private to > > committers only. Should it be? > > I personally think it is very sane for this list to be public. Definitely. There have been enough complaints about secrecy surrounding the PSF, no need to start with CPython development. > I agree there're very strong reasons to keep it public. I just wanted to > emphasize Chris's note because I'm pretty sure that some devs assume it's not > public when writing on controversial topics (like the recent conversation). Another benefit of using lists through gmane: if it's on there, it must be public :) cheers, Georg From eliben at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 18:44:34 2012 From: eliben at gmail.com (Eli Bendersky) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 09:44:34 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> <20121226154743.754032500B6@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Georg Brandl wrote: > The SSH key is added; tracker privileges were already given. > > Welcome Serhiy! > > Yes, welcome! Serhiy, if you haven't already done so, please subscribe to python-committers. Eli On 12/26/2012 05:02 PM, Andrew Svetlov wrote: > Ok. Thanks. > > Sent to Serhiy link to instructions for next steps > (http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges) > as Nick suggested. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rdmurray at bitdance.com Wed Dec 26 18:45:04 2012 From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 12:45:04 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] privacy In-Reply-To: <1356540841.3399.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <1356540841.3399.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20121226174505.1AF702500B6@webabinitio.net> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:54:01 +0100, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > Le mercredi 26 d??cembre 2012 ?? 08:08 -0800, Eli Bendersky a ??crit : > > At the risk of stating something that I imagine everyone already > > knows, this list is itself publicly viewable: > > > > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > > > > So in some sense what we write here is already being said > > beyond this > > list (though not actively). For example, the thread we're > > engaging in > > right now is the second result when Googling "python anatoly". > > > > I guess my point is that what's going on is already pretty > > open to the > > outside (from a read-only perspective). > > > > > > > > Ouch, this is important to keep in mind. Thanks for the reminder, > > Chris. > > > > This may be a different discussion altogether, but I'm pretty sure > > that sometimes people write to this list assuming it's private to > > committers only. Should it be? > > I personally think it is very sane for this list to be public. And I agree, as I noted previously in the middle of a longer post :) --David From rdmurray at bitdance.com Wed Dec 26 18:49:30 2012 From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 12:49:30 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: <20121226174931.3E9492500B6@webabinitio.net> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 18:56:54 +0200, Ezio Melotti wrote: > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Brian Curtin wrote: > > > You're wasting your time if you think you will be the one to break > > through to him after several people have already talked to him. > > Apparently he even got on Skype with Guido about this. People would > > *pay* to have that chance. Anatoly got it for being a jerk and it > > changed nothing. > > > > So, I contacted him and we chatted for about an hour. > He said that he's been trying to pay more attention and improve his > messages lately. > We went through a list of problems and he was willing to listen (he > actually seemed more polite than I expected). > He also seemed somewhat frustrated by the fact that his messages are taken > in a negative way, because he doesn't mean to be negative. > I also went through his recent messages on the tracker to find "negative" > examples but admittedly they mostly seem OK, so I wonder if "our" opinion > towards him is already negatively biased and leads us to be less tolerant > with him > At the end he thanked me for bringing this up with him, and apparently he > is willing to improve. This is great. Certainly my reading of the issue title I mentioned in my previous email was an overreaction. I will do my best to reset my personal filters :) --David From lukasz at langa.pl Wed Dec 26 18:51:21 2012 From: lukasz at langa.pl (=?utf-8?Q?=C5=81ukasz_Langa?=) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 18:51:21 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] privacy In-Reply-To: <1356540841.3399.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <1356540841.3399.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <6506F7DF-568B-4033-B977-1E81B4D28A05@langa.pl> Dnia 26 gru 2012 o godz. 17:54 Antoine Pitrou napisa?(a): > I personally think it is very sane for this list to be public. Absolutely. -- Best regards, ?ukasz Langa From solipsis at pitrou.net Wed Dec 26 18:53:00 2012 From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 18:53:00 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> <20121226154743.754032500B6@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: <1356544380.3399.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Le mercredi 26 d?cembre 2012 ? 18:38 +0100, Georg Brandl a ?crit : > The SSH key is added; tracker privileges were already given. > > Welcome Serhiy! Welcome indeed (und fr?hlich Weihnachten)! Regards Antoine. From storchaka at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 19:00:06 2012 From: storchaka at gmail.com (Serhiy Storchaka) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 20:00:06 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> Message-ID: <201212262000.07100.storchaka@gmail.com> ?????? 26 ??????? 2012 19:44:34 Eli Bendersky ?? ????????: > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Georg Brandl wrote: > > The SSH key is added; tracker privileges were already given. > > > > Welcome Serhiy! > > Yes, welcome! > > Serhiy, if you haven't already done so, please subscribe to > python-committers. Thanks. My request has been forwarded to the list moderator for approval. From eric at trueblade.com Wed Dec 26 19:02:38 2012 From: eric at trueblade.com (Eric V. Smith) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 13:02:38 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: <201212262000.07100.storchaka@gmail.com> References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <201212262000.07100.storchaka@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50DB3BBE.1050603@trueblade.com> On 12/26/2012 1:00 PM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote: > ?????? 26 ??????? 2012 19:44:34 Eli Bendersky ?? ????????: >> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Georg Brandl wrote: >>> The SSH key is added; tracker privileges were already given. >>> >>> Welcome Serhiy! >> >> Yes, welcome! >> >> Serhiy, if you haven't already done so, please subscribe to >> python-committers. > > Thanks. My request has been forwarded to the list moderator for approval. And I approved it. Welcome, Serhiy! -- Eric. From lukasz at langa.pl Wed Dec 26 19:07:15 2012 From: lukasz at langa.pl (=?iso-8859-2?Q?=A3ukasz_Langa?=) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 19:07:15 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <20121226173751.A614C2500B6@webabinitio.net> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226173751 .A614C2500B6@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: <5B0244F7-E246-40DA-AFB6-161A4C0758E6@langa.pl> Wiadomo?? napisana przez "R. David Murray" w dniu 26 gru 2012, o godz. 18:37: > Because, to put it in new age-y terms, his bad vibrations are poisoning > the environment. Thank you. Your entire response expresses my thoughts exactly. -- Best regards, ?ukasz Langa Senior Systems Architecture Engineer IT Infrastructure Department Grupa Allegro Sp. z o.o. http://lukasz.langa.pl/ +48 791 080 144 From lukasz at langa.pl Wed Dec 26 19:11:42 2012 From: lukasz at langa.pl (=?iso-8859-2?Q?=A3ukasz_Langa?=) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 19:11:42 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: Wiadomo?? napisana przez Ezio Melotti w dniu 26 gru 2012, o godz. 17:56: > At the end he thanked me for bringing this up with him, and apparently he is willing to improve. > Full disclosure: I'm not buying it. But I'd *love* to be proven wrong and am willing to give him time to show that his attitude improved. At worst, we can treat your conversation as the "explicit warning" other committers asked about. -- Best regards, ?ukasz Langa From chris.jerdonek at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 21:29:47 2012 From: chris.jerdonek at gmail.com (Chris Jerdonek) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 12:29:47 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:28 AM, R. David Murray wrote: >> >> On 12/25/2012 5:56 PM, ?ukasz Langa wrote: >> > I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely >> > without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the >> > future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if >> > only for transparency reasons. >> >> This strike me as over-reaction. > > I'm not at all sure that it is, but that "most likely" had better be > replaced by "most certainly". Such a policy needs to rest on fundamental > principles. "Bad cases make bad law", so one must be careful not to > craft a policy to deal only with a specific egregious thing, but rather > craft something that will serve well in the general cases. Specifically, > any such policy, and any statement made if we take action on Anatoly, will > have to address the inevitable calls that we are engaging in censorship. > There are principled answers to that charge, but we must decide which > of them we are following and why, and articulate that clearly and > consistently. +1. It might seem bureaucratic to some, but I think grounding actions in due process and documented policy is important. The Diversity Statement is a good example of this. (That statement has a different purpose though. It's more about something we want rather than how to handle something we don't want.): http://www.python.org/community/diversity/ What is CoC by the way? > As an aside, it has occurred to me that the fundamental problem here is > that we do not feel that Anatoly respects *us*. So it is no wonder that > we are offended and do not respect him. FWIW, I've found him to be more what I'd call spammy/annoying and lacking in some areas rather than disrespectful (opening many issues with vague descriptions, starting more than his share of threads on python-ideas, etc). So I've never felt offended. Granted, I'm relatively new to being involved and don't follow him closely. I quickly learned to pass over most of what he writes for lack of time. It's a source of amazement to me that what he writes sometimes leads to something productive. --Chris From ezio.melotti at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 21:42:18 2012 From: ezio.melotti at gmail.com (Ezio Melotti) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 22:42:18 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <20121226173751.A614C2500B6@webabinitio.net> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226173751.A614C2500B6@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 7:37 PM, R. David Murray wrote: > On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 18:20:06 +0200, Ezio Melotti > wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:07 PM, ?ukasz Langa wrote: > > > I don't want to spell out names but I've had more than one discussion > at > > > conferences this year with people _afraid_ to get involved with core > > > development on the base of having to deal with behaviour like this. In > one > > > case the comment was simply "I don't have time to deal with [people] > like > > > him." > > > > This is somewhat surprising to me. Why would they have to deal with him? > > If the "people like him" were the core developers I could understand the > > problem, but he is just one of the many contributors. > > Because, to put it in new age-y terms, his bad vibrations are poisoning > the environment. > > I considered this but probably underestimated it -- after all there are many other contributors that produce enough "good vibrations". My skewed perception might be due to the fact that I don't contribute actively to the python-dev/ideas MLs. > That is perhaps a graphic way to put it, but it is a matter of community > tone and nurturing a joyful and creative environment in which all are > welcome and feel encouraged to contribute. > > Anatoly works against that, almost constantly. Encouraging him to > support the community would be *much* better than banning him...but > we've tried that. > > > > The other case was sadder though: "Looks like you core devs have > trouble > > > dealing with criticism, as shown by Anatoly." > > > > > I'm not sure I understand this. ISTM that the problem here is with core > > devs, that are unable to deal with criticism (and have to resort to bans > ;) > > rather than with him. > > By "not understand", I presume you mean the "sadder" comment. > > It is not that we are *unable* to deal with criticism. We have dealt > reasonably with every criticism he has leveled, I think. But his comments > create the *perception* that we are not dealing well with criticism, > because he is not but casts the aspersion onto us, while we do that much > less frequently to him, but do occasionally lapse into returning tit > for tat. Since we are perceived as the ones in the position of power, > we get castigated for our actions and reactions much more than Anatoly, > the one perceived to be powerless in the situation, ever will be. > > Let me repeat that bit, it is important. We are perceived as being the > ones in the position of power, and he the powerless. That perception > (and the reality behind it) will color every conversation that the wider > community has about this issue. That is why I stress that our position > and our actions have to come from well articulated principles, otherwise > they will be perceived as caprice. > > Which, I think, is more or less why you are arguing we should not > take action. > > Good point, and that's indeed one of the reasons why I'm against taking actions. If we do people might get scared away because they don't want to be banned or because they think we are not open to criticism or new ideas. > However, dealing reasonably with him gets harder and harder over time. > It is a failing in me as a person, but every time I see a message from > Anatoly, my gut clenches up and I go into a defensive mode, and want to > prove him wrong. Knowing this, I actually try to see if there's something good in his suggestions so that they don't get overlooked by devs that are ignoring him (that depends on the issues though). > So I have to master myself and try to speak reasonably, > and try to not give back to him what he gives to us. I hope I'm getting > better at that, but... > > That's laudable, and I wish everyone else would do that. > Take issue 16781 as a recent example. I wanted to prove him wrong, > both because of his past actions and because of my perception (probably > colored by those past actions) of his choice of title for the issue > ("execfile/exec messes up...") But there is a real (documentation) > issue there. We discussed about that, but unfortunately I missed the original title. My criticism (albeit mild) was about the use of the word "magical(ly)" that seems to imply that the behavior of Python is magical and obscure. He said that from his point of view the behavior looked magical, and I don't think he meant it as a non-constructive criticism against Python. > I managed to moderate my tone...almost. I still failed: > I said "the fact that the print works should be a clue", implying that > he should have seen it himself, But if I were dealing with anyone else, > I would have said, "The fact that the print works is a clue..." > > This difference is *subtle*. But those subtleties are *important* in > determining the tone of a community, the supportiveness of a community, > the openness of a community, the inclusiveness of a community. Someone > reading my comment on that bug without knowing Anatoly's history would > think that the Python community is very stuck up. It is so easy to > forget that our words to Anatoly are not read just by him, but by many > many other people. > > This also work in the opposite directions. We might give more weight to some word or expressions than he actually meant to convey (see the "magical" example). > Anatoly spreads negativity almost (but not every!) time he opens his > mouth, negativity which is then compounded by our natural human reactions > to his tone. Yes it would be great if we could all master ourselves > and always speak to him reasonably no matter the provocation, and yes > we absolutely should strive very hard for that goal. It should be one > of our guiding principles as a community. > > But is that enough? > > Remember, the issue isn't just *us*, the issue is also the effect on > people with whom we never interact directly, people who may flee the > community, or not join it, because of the negativity produced by both > sides. > > That's why we shouldn't produce it from our side, especially because we are in many. If he's fighting alone, the negativity will be isolated and ignored, but if we fight back it will broadcasted throughout the community. Personally I'm very patient, and it's almost impossible to offend me or get me angry, but I understand other people have problems controlling their feelings in some circumstances. > Full disclosure: despite arguing here for *doing something* about Anatoly, > I am in fact somewhat ambivalent about what. I have no problem with > banning him for specific actions (such as a ban from the tracker for > repeatedly reopening an issue). But what, if any, other actions should > be taken I am not clear on. > > > > We strive to be a welcoming bunch and I'm convinced that a part of > this is > > > to call out anti-social behaviour and stop it. Otherwise our playground > > > stops looking like a fun and safe place to contribute. > > > > And a side effect of being welcoming is that you get every kind of > people. > > Different people have different behaviors and skills. I don't think his > > lack of social skills is worse than e.g. the lack of English skills of > some > > of the contributors. In both cases the intentions are not bad, but the > > message might be difficult to understand and thus can be misunderstood. > > These people shouldn't be marginalized just because of their lack of > skills. > > As an example, I recently found out that one contributor on the tracker > > that sounded somewhat annoying actually was a ~10 years old kid. From > that > > point of view his contributions went from somewhat annoying to quite > > impressive (and I think some of his patches have been committed too). > > Of course if people have an intentionally destructive behavior they can > be > > stopped. > > As Nick pointed out, the problem isn't who he was coming in to the Python > community. The problem is that he hasn't learned to support the community > instead of tear it down, after *years* of effort on the community's part. That might be because the problem came up explicitly only recently. He got some signs before, but either he missed them, he didn't think the problem was so serious, or he was unable to solve it. Now that he has been warned explicitly and the problem has been made clear, I hope he'll manage to find a solution (and he seems to be willing to do it). Best Regards, Ezio Melotti -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andrew.svetlov at gmail.com Wed Dec 26 22:18:58 2012 From: andrew.svetlov at gmail.com (Andrew Svetlov) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 23:18:58 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: <50DB3BBE.1050603@trueblade.com> References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <201212262000.07100.storchaka@gmail.com> <50DB3BBE.1050603@trueblade.com> Message-ID: Welcome, Serhiy! Glad to see you in committers list. On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Eric V. Smith wrote: > On 12/26/2012 1:00 PM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote: >> ?????? 26 ??????? 2012 19:44:34 Eli Bendersky ?? ????????: >>> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Georg Brandl wrote: >>>> The SSH key is added; tracker privileges were already given. >>>> >>>> Welcome Serhiy! >>> >>> Yes, welcome! >>> >>> Serhiy, if you haven't already done so, please subscribe to >>> python-committers. >> >> Thanks. My request has been forwarded to the list moderator for approval. > > And I approved it. Welcome, Serhiy! > > -- > Eric. > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers -- Thanks, Andrew Svetlov From jcea at jcea.es Thu Dec 27 01:46:51 2012 From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea) Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 01:46:51 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: <50DB9A7B.6060505@jcea.es> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 26/12/12 17:38, Brian Curtin wrote: > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Ezio Melotti > wrote: >> And a side effect of being welcoming is that you get every kind >> of people. Different people have different behaviors and skills. >> I don't think his lack of social skills is worse than e.g. the >> lack of English skills of some of the contributors. In both >> cases the intentions are not bad, but the message might be >> difficult to understand and thus can be misunderstood. These >> people shouldn't be marginalized just because of their lack of >> skills. > > Now we're just trying to marginalize abuse. There is no lack of > skills that is causing this, and it's not any sort of > misunderstanding. Nick has presented numerous examples of this. I found this text very interesting and quite valuable: http://producingoss.com/ Notably relevant here: http://producingoss.com/en/difficult-people.html - -- Jes?s Cea Avi?n _/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org _/_/ _/_/ _/_/_/_/_/ . _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "Things are not so easy" _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "My name is Dump, Core Dump" _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQCVAwUBUNuae5lgi5GaxT1NAQIsAQP/V6i6HcA46hyYhcw5robNJrL/mkTcvaSD W4EzbKZOjoZqSlAAvx2YeedU+STb7CW+staBrQzmrmDP9VSqJyyuLQzyv4veskBw vRaysmVltycyUhwMm83fla542GIaGqFUJz3W2Sv+F3B+qiWjr/xSSVNLjGc5n2fZ odrG/MfhzvA= =S19p -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From hs at ox.cx Thu Dec 27 09:53:52 2012 From: hs at ox.cx (Hynek Schlawack) Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 09:53:52 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> <20121226154743.754032500B6@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: > The SSH key is added; tracker privileges were already given. He hasn?t dat snake yet though. :) > Welcome Serhiy! Welcome indeed. ?h > > Georg > > On 12/26/2012 05:02 PM, Andrew Svetlov wrote: >> Ok. Thanks. >> >> Sent to Serhiy link to instructions for next steps >> (http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges) >> as Nick suggested. >> >> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:47 PM, R. David Murray wrote: >>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:36:46 +0200, Andrew Svetlov wrote: >>>> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >>>>> Run through the sections here: >>>>> http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges >>>>> >>>>> The main one is for Serhiy to send an email with his public SSH key to >>>>> hgaccounts at python.org (I believe the folks on that list are also >>>>> tracker admins) and set himself up with a read/write clone. >>>> >>>> http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#gaining-commit-privileges >>>> at start says something about ?an official offer to become a Python >>>> core developer?. >>>> >>>> Who have to send this letter and do we need to wait some time for >>>> getting possible objections from any developers? >>> >>> Consensus on this list is as official as it gets, and we've already >>> allowed plenty of time for people to express objections. So the >>> email asking him if he wanted to become a committer was the official >>> offer :) >>> >>> --David >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> python-committers mailing list >>> python-committers at python.org >>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers >>> >> >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers From storchaka at gmail.com Fri Dec 28 00:10:50 2012 From: storchaka at gmail.com (Serhiy Storchaka) Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 01:10:50 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: <1356544380.3399.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> <20121226154743.754032500B6@webabinitio.net> <1356544380.3399.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On 26.12.12 19:53, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > Le mercredi 26 d?cembre 2012 ? 18:38 +0100, Georg Brandl a ?crit : >> The SSH key is added; tracker privileges were already given. >> Welcome Serhiy! > > Welcome indeed (und fr?hlich Weihnachten)! Thank you. But you have something mixed up, Antoine. ;) Je n'ai pas l'allemand. From solipsis at pitrou.net Fri Dec 28 13:10:35 2012 From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou) Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 13:10:35 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka? In-Reply-To: References: <20121224170735.GA87460@snakebite.org> <50DA3269.1090402@udel.edu> <20121226154743.754032500B6@webabinitio.net> <1356544380.3399.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1356696635.3290.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Le vendredi 28 d?cembre 2012 ? 01:10 +0200, Serhiy Storchaka a ?crit : > On 26.12.12 19:53, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > Le mercredi 26 d?cembre 2012 ? 18:38 +0100, Georg Brandl a ?crit : > >> The SSH key is added; tracker privileges were already given. > >> Welcome Serhiy! > > > > Welcome indeed (und fr?hlich Weihnachten)! > > Thank you. But you have something mixed up, Antoine. ;) Je n'ai pas > l'allemand. That was a minor wink in Georg's general direction ;) Regards Antoine. From brian at python.org Fri Dec 28 17:41:02 2012 From: brian at python.org (Brian Curtin) Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 10:41:02 -0600 Subject: [python-committers] MSDN subscriptions - new or renew Message-ID: Hi all, Before we begin: please respond directly to me. I've gotten a few requests for MSDN subscription renewals, so I may as well do a big call out to try and do this as a big group to make it easier on MS. If you're due/overdue for a renewal, send me the email address you use to login and the Subscriber ID -- this is found at https://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/manage/ when you're logged in. If you do not currently have an MSDN subscription but are interested, Microsoft's Open Source Technology Center provides our contributors with free MSDN subscriptions to allow you to get OS and Visual Studio installers/licenses. Please provide the following information if you're interested: First Name: Last Name: Email Address: Project/Company: Python Software Foundation Complete Mailing Address: Phone Number: Since the Microsoft employee who helps us with this is unlikely to respond right away due to the holidays, I'm going to gather up details and send them on 2 January, 2013. After he responds, it typically takes one week before you receive login details. Brian From jcea at jcea.es Fri Dec 28 17:53:09 2012 From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea) Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 17:53:09 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] MSDN subscriptions - new or renew In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50DDCE75.7060007@jcea.es> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I was wondering if we could ask Oracle (pufff) about Solaris 10/11 patch support :-?. - -- Jes?s Cea Avi?n _/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org _/_/ _/_/ _/_/_/_/_/ . _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "Things are not so easy" _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "My name is Dump, Core Dump" _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQCVAwUBUN3OdZlgi5GaxT1NAQIPuAQAlyi4uQhy4DMHs36vShD3/RTzeb7R/5Vu /00qz35UNYQz9qt8cPO4Fl5m0tecg1kVOkOy7Qrd3dTivHgD3F15cXajQuyJBOaT Vvrck3XTWMCP2qgk0gkKmKLYtRsTR6z5goRCpg9/1AGFaP4AuV6FOuL4dtv5+eV7 P1XLhX4l3FQ= =t2tp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From brett at python.org Fri Dec 28 20:39:36 2012 From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon) Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 14:39:36 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Chris Jerdonek wrote: > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:28 AM, R. David Murray > wrote: > >> > >> On 12/25/2012 5:56 PM, ?ukasz Langa wrote: > >> > I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely > >> > without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the > >> > future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if > >> > only for transparency reasons. > >> > >> This strike me as over-reaction. > > > > I'm not at all sure that it is, but that "most likely" had better be > > replaced by "most certainly". Such a policy needs to rest on fundamental > > principles. "Bad cases make bad law", so one must be careful not to > > craft a policy to deal only with a specific egregious thing, but rather > > craft something that will serve well in the general cases. Specifically, > > any such policy, and any statement made if we take action on Anatoly, > will > > have to address the inevitable calls that we are engaging in censorship. > > There are principled answers to that charge, but we must decide which > > of them we are following and why, and articulate that clearly and > > consistently. > > +1. It might seem bureaucratic to some, but I think grounding actions > in due process and documented policy is important. The Diversity > Statement is a good example of this. (That statement has a different > purpose though. It's more about something we want rather than how to > handle something we don't want.): > > http://www.python.org/community/diversity/ > > What is CoC by the way? > Code of Conduct. -Brett > > > As an aside, it has occurred to me that the fundamental problem here is > > that we do not feel that Anatoly respects *us*. So it is no wonder that > > we are offended and do not respect him. > > FWIW, I've found him to be more what I'd call spammy/annoying and > lacking in some areas rather than disrespectful (opening many issues > with vague descriptions, starting more than his share of threads on > python-ideas, etc). So I've never felt offended. Granted, I'm > relatively new to being involved and don't follow him closely. I > quickly learned to pass over most of what he writes for lack of time. > It's a source of amazement to me that what he writes sometimes leads > to something productive. > This is where I disagree with everyone who is defending Anatoly as someone who can be redeemed and given yet another chance to allow him to continue to poison the community where he participates because he is just "annoying". On python-dev I checked my email on Xmas morning to an email from Anatoly where he said "What should I do in case Eric lost interest after his GSoC project for PSF appeared as useless for python-dev community". That is not "spammy/annoying" but flat-out disrespectful and rude. I think I was the first person to publicly state I put Anatoly's email into the trash after he publicly said the PSF board should be completely disbanded and we should restructure the PSF because he viewed it as worthless. That was not annoying but disrespectful. We have spent **years** trying to get him to be more productive and yet he manages to not to. He flat-out refuses to sign any contributor agreement and expects us to do all the work and gets mad when we don't spend our free time fixing what he wants us to. He won't even search the internet for prior discussions as David has pointed out. That's not annoying but disrespectful. I fully understand that we are all nice people and don't want to do anything drastic, but simply ignoring him doesn't solve the issue for new people to the community who come to python-ideas, python-dev, or even the tracker on occasion and actually take the time to read his emails, reply, etc. and don't realize that a decent chunk of core developers never even see their responses as the entire thread has already been deleted/muted in the core dev's inbox. If I was new and spent some time replying to a thread only to find out that the person was being ignored and thus my hard work as well I would be frustrated. In order to deal with this, here is my proposal that should placate those of us calling for a ban now and those that feel like there has not been enough of a warning ((I can't communicate with him because I want him banned and I personally don't get along with him even in person, so any place where someone should talk to him it can't be me in the name of fairness to the process): 1. Someone emails Anatoly to tell him he is on indefinite probation for his behaviour where it is pointed out he can no longer insult anyone (including the PSF), he can't re-open issues without an explicit solution to the problem for why it closed, and in general has to just behave and not be rude 2. We agree to point out to him nicely and calmly when he has screwed up and overstepped his bounds while on this probation and to record when that happened (an email here about any incident should be enough) so that he can learn from his mistakes 3. If we do not see a pattern of improvement (this can be noticed by anyone and I'm sure we can get a consensus on it; unanimity is not required because that is impossible for anything with a group of our size), he gets cut off from the resource he is abusing the most and those cut-offs will continue on other locations if he does not improve there as well 4. If it goes as far as he is cut off and he manages to get the point and behaves elsewhere he can be allowed back on to where he has been banned after a year has passed (IOW he has to show actual improvement) Three key points in this proposal. One is that he gets an official warning; no more side discussions with core devs, no more "does he know people want to ban him" questions as it will be clear and explicit. He will be flat-out told his attitude and actions are not acceptable as they stand and they need to change. Two is that there is no time limit so that he doesn't just hide away for e.g. six months, comes back, and then starts stirring up trouble while saying he behaved within the allotted time that he had to. Any change needs to be permanent and perpetuate forever. Three, the cut-offs are gradual per resource so that it isn't an over-arching nuclear option. I say Ezio lets him know that this is the plan since he talked to him recently and is in the no-ban-yet camp. But even if people don't like the explicit steps as I have outlined them as a general rule, someone who doesn't want him banned should tell him flat-out that he is on thin ice as I am an admin for python-ideas and this plan is what I will institute starting January 1 for that list and he is on the top of the list of people who will be in trouble if their attitude does not change (I am about to email Titus about drafting up a CoC for python-ideas so that this applies to everyone, not just Anatoly). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chris.jerdonek at gmail.com Fri Dec 28 22:38:43 2012 From: chris.jerdonek at gmail.com (Chris Jerdonek) Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 13:38:43 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Chris Jerdonek > wrote: >> >> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:28 AM, R. David Murray >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 12/25/2012 5:56 PM, ?ukasz Langa wrote: >> >> > I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely >> >> > without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the >> >> > future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if >> >> > only for transparency reasons. >> >> >> >> This strike me as over-reaction. >> > >> > I'm not at all sure that it is, but that "most likely" had better be >> > replaced by "most certainly". Such a policy needs to rest on >> > fundamental >> > principles. "Bad cases make bad law", so one must be careful not to >> > craft a policy to deal only with a specific egregious thing, but rather >> > craft something that will serve well in the general cases. >> > Specifically, >> > any such policy, and any statement made if we take action on Anatoly, >> > will >> > have to address the inevitable calls that we are engaging in censorship. >> > There are principled answers to that charge, but we must decide which >> > of them we are following and why, and articulate that clearly and >> > consistently. >> >> +1. It might seem bureaucratic to some, but I think grounding actions >> in due process and documented policy is important. The Diversity >> Statement is a good example of this. (That statement has a different >> purpose though. It's more about something we want rather than how to >> handle something we don't want.): >> >> http://www.python.org/community/diversity/ >> >> What is CoC by the way? > > > Code of Conduct. > > -Brett > >> >> >> > As an aside, it has occurred to me that the fundamental problem here is >> > that we do not feel that Anatoly respects *us*. So it is no wonder that >> > we are offended and do not respect him. >> >> FWIW, I've found him to be more what I'd call spammy/annoying and >> lacking in some areas rather than disrespectful (opening many issues >> with vague descriptions, starting more than his share of threads on >> python-ideas, etc). So I've never felt offended. Granted, I'm >> relatively new to being involved and don't follow him closely. I >> quickly learned to pass over most of what he writes for lack of time. >> It's a source of amazement to me that what he writes sometimes leads >> to something productive. > > > This is where I disagree with everyone who is defending Anatoly as someone > who can be redeemed and given yet another chance to allow him to continue to > poison the community where he participates because he is just "annoying". On > python-dev I checked my email on Xmas morning to an email from Anatoly where > he said "What should I do in case Eric lost interest after his GSoC project > for PSF appeared as useless for python-dev community". That is not > "spammy/annoying" but flat-out disrespectful and rude. > > I think I was the first person to publicly state I put Anatoly's email into > the trash after he publicly said the PSF board should be completely > disbanded and we should restructure the PSF because he viewed it as > worthless. That was not annoying but disrespectful. > > We have spent **years** trying to get him to be more productive and yet he > manages to not to. He flat-out refuses to sign any contributor agreement and > expects us to do all the work and gets mad when we don't spend our free time > fixing what he wants us to. He won't even search the internet for prior > discussions as David has pointed out. That's not annoying but disrespectful. > > I fully understand that we are all nice people and don't want to do anything > drastic, but simply ignoring him doesn't solve the issue for new people to > the community who come to python-ideas, python-dev, or even the tracker on > occasion and actually take the time to read his emails, reply, etc. and > don't realize that a decent chunk of core developers never even see their > responses as the entire thread has already been deleted/muted in the core > dev's inbox. If I was new and spent some time replying to a thread only to > find out that the person was being ignored and thus my hard work as well I > would be frustrated. > > In order to deal with this, here is my proposal that should placate those of > us calling for a ban now and those that feel like there has not been enough > of a warning ((I can't communicate with him because I want him banned and I > personally don't get along with him even in person, so any place where > someone should talk to him it can't be me in the name of fairness to the > process): > > 1. Someone emails Anatoly to tell him he is on indefinite probation for his > behaviour where it is pointed out he can no longer insult anyone (including > the PSF), he can't re-open issues without an explicit solution to the > problem for why it closed, and in general has to just behave and not be rude > > 2. We agree to point out to him nicely and calmly when he has screwed up and > overstepped his bounds while on this probation and to record when that > happened (an email here about any incident should be enough) so that he can > learn from his mistakes > > 3. If we do not see a pattern of improvement (this can be noticed by anyone > and I'm sure we can get a consensus on it; unanimity is not required because > that is impossible for anything with a group of our size), he gets cut off > from the resource he is abusing the most and those cut-offs will continue on > other locations if he does not improve there as well > > 4. If it goes as far as he is cut off and he manages to get the point and > behaves elsewhere he can be allowed back on to where he has been banned > after a year has passed (IOW he has to show actual improvement) > > Three key points in this proposal. One is that he gets an official warning; > no more side discussions with core devs, no more "does he know people want > to ban him" questions as it will be clear and explicit. He will be flat-out > told his attitude and actions are not acceptable as they stand and they need > to change. > > Two is that there is no time limit so that he doesn't just hide away for > e.g. six months, comes back, and then starts stirring up trouble while > saying he behaved within the allotted time that he had to. Any change needs > to be permanent and perpetuate forever. > > Three, the cut-offs are gradual per resource so that it isn't an > over-arching nuclear option. > > I say Ezio lets him know that this is the plan since he talked to him > recently and is in the no-ban-yet camp. But even if people don't like the > explicit steps as I have outlined them as a general rule, someone who > doesn't want him banned should tell him flat-out that he is on thin ice as I > am an admin for python-ideas and this plan is what I will institute starting > January 1 for that list and he is on the top of the list of people who will > be in trouble if their attitude does not change (I am about to email Titus > about drafting up a CoC for python-ideas so that this applies to everyone, > not just Anatoly). Thanks, Brett. These steps sound great to me. It would be good if the e-mail for (1) is posted here (either before or after sending but preferably before). Is Ezio being asked to let him know about (1) through (4) or to actually do (1)? To make the e-mail official, it should say it is being sent on behalf of this group or be signed by more than one person and CC more than one core dev. Also, for the record I never meant to defend Anatoly and don't personally believe he can be redeemed. I just felt he should be officially warned as a matter of process. Also, I admit that I was wrong in implying that he didn't disrespect the group or community. His recent e-mail about Eric's project was terrible. It was more how I felt personally because there is a point at which you start disregarding and not taking seriously anything a person says (he is past that point). The point about new people who don't have that understanding yet is a very good one. --Chris From mrjbq7 at gmail.com Fri Dec 28 23:15:10 2012 From: mrjbq7 at gmail.com (John Benediktsson) Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 22:15:10 +0000 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: I would caution against using hypothetical "new people" (that maybe possibly could be offended in some way that might create harm either to that person or the community) as a reason for taking this action. Does anyone know if this has actually occurred? And in any significant numbers? I see a group of hard working core developers that are frustrated quite legitimately and struggling with policing the content of official message boards, but that energy might push you in directions that are more harmful than not. Be sure of who you are acting against, the person more than the emails. There is strong incidence of mental illness in the tech community and there are also persons with significantly different email personalities than actual personality. I see Anatoly as someone who isn't a mean person but might not be a proper communicator. Openness and inclusion is a higher good than censorship and elitism. Best, John. On Dec 28, 2012, at 9:38 PM, Chris Jerdonek wrote: > On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Chris Jerdonek >> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:28 AM, R. David Murray >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 12/25/2012 5:56 PM, ?ukasz Langa wrote: >>>>>> I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely >>>>>> without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the >>>>>> future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if >>>>>> only for transparency reasons. >>>>> >>>>> This strike me as over-reaction. >>>> >>>> I'm not at all sure that it is, but that "most likely" had better be >>>> replaced by "most certainly". Such a policy needs to rest on >>>> fundamental >>>> principles. "Bad cases make bad law", so one must be careful not to >>>> craft a policy to deal only with a specific egregious thing, but rather >>>> craft something that will serve well in the general cases. >>>> Specifically, >>>> any such policy, and any statement made if we take action on Anatoly, >>>> will >>>> have to address the inevitable calls that we are engaging in censorship. >>>> There are principled answers to that charge, but we must decide which >>>> of them we are following and why, and articulate that clearly and >>>> consistently. >>> >>> +1. It might seem bureaucratic to some, but I think grounding actions >>> in due process and documented policy is important. The Diversity >>> Statement is a good example of this. (That statement has a different >>> purpose though. It's more about something we want rather than how to >>> handle something we don't want.): >>> >>> http://www.python.org/community/diversity/ >>> >>> What is CoC by the way? >> >> >> Code of Conduct. >> >> -Brett >> >>> >>> >>>> As an aside, it has occurred to me that the fundamental problem here is >>>> that we do not feel that Anatoly respects *us*. So it is no wonder that >>>> we are offended and do not respect him. >>> >>> FWIW, I've found him to be more what I'd call spammy/annoying and >>> lacking in some areas rather than disrespectful (opening many issues >>> with vague descriptions, starting more than his share of threads on >>> python-ideas, etc). So I've never felt offended. Granted, I'm >>> relatively new to being involved and don't follow him closely. I >>> quickly learned to pass over most of what he writes for lack of time. >>> It's a source of amazement to me that what he writes sometimes leads >>> to something productive. >> >> >> This is where I disagree with everyone who is defending Anatoly as someone >> who can be redeemed and given yet another chance to allow him to continue to >> poison the community where he participates because he is just "annoying". On >> python-dev I checked my email on Xmas morning to an email from Anatoly where >> he said "What should I do in case Eric lost interest after his GSoC project >> for PSF appeared as useless for python-dev community". That is not >> "spammy/annoying" but flat-out disrespectful and rude. >> >> I think I was the first person to publicly state I put Anatoly's email into >> the trash after he publicly said the PSF board should be completely >> disbanded and we should restructure the PSF because he viewed it as >> worthless. That was not annoying but disrespectful. >> >> We have spent **years** trying to get him to be more productive and yet he >> manages to not to. He flat-out refuses to sign any contributor agreement and >> expects us to do all the work and gets mad when we don't spend our free time >> fixing what he wants us to. He won't even search the internet for prior >> discussions as David has pointed out. That's not annoying but disrespectful. >> >> I fully understand that we are all nice people and don't want to do anything >> drastic, but simply ignoring him doesn't solve the issue for new people to >> the community who come to python-ideas, python-dev, or even the tracker on >> occasion and actually take the time to read his emails, reply, etc. and >> don't realize that a decent chunk of core developers never even see their >> responses as the entire thread has already been deleted/muted in the core >> dev's inbox. If I was new and spent some time replying to a thread only to >> find out that the person was being ignored and thus my hard work as well I >> would be frustrated. >> >> In order to deal with this, here is my proposal that should placate those of >> us calling for a ban now and those that feel like there has not been enough >> of a warning ((I can't communicate with him because I want him banned and I >> personally don't get along with him even in person, so any place where >> someone should talk to him it can't be me in the name of fairness to the >> process): >> >> 1. Someone emails Anatoly to tell him he is on indefinite probation for his >> behaviour where it is pointed out he can no longer insult anyone (including >> the PSF), he can't re-open issues without an explicit solution to the >> problem for why it closed, and in general has to just behave and not be rude >> >> 2. We agree to point out to him nicely and calmly when he has screwed up and >> overstepped his bounds while on this probation and to record when that >> happened (an email here about any incident should be enough) so that he can >> learn from his mistakes >> >> 3. If we do not see a pattern of improvement (this can be noticed by anyone >> and I'm sure we can get a consensus on it; unanimity is not required because >> that is impossible for anything with a group of our size), he gets cut off >> from the resource he is abusing the most and those cut-offs will continue on >> other locations if he does not improve there as well >> >> 4. If it goes as far as he is cut off and he manages to get the point and >> behaves elsewhere he can be allowed back on to where he has been banned >> after a year has passed (IOW he has to show actual improvement) >> >> Three key points in this proposal. One is that he gets an official warning; >> no more side discussions with core devs, no more "does he know people want >> to ban him" questions as it will be clear and explicit. He will be flat-out >> told his attitude and actions are not acceptable as they stand and they need >> to change. >> >> Two is that there is no time limit so that he doesn't just hide away for >> e.g. six months, comes back, and then starts stirring up trouble while >> saying he behaved within the allotted time that he had to. Any change needs >> to be permanent and perpetuate forever. >> >> Three, the cut-offs are gradual per resource so that it isn't an >> over-arching nuclear option. >> >> I say Ezio lets him know that this is the plan since he talked to him >> recently and is in the no-ban-yet camp. But even if people don't like the >> explicit steps as I have outlined them as a general rule, someone who >> doesn't want him banned should tell him flat-out that he is on thin ice as I >> am an admin for python-ideas and this plan is what I will institute starting >> January 1 for that list and he is on the top of the list of people who will >> be in trouble if their attitude does not change (I am about to email Titus >> about drafting up a CoC for python-ideas so that this applies to everyone, >> not just Anatoly). > > Thanks, Brett. These steps sound great to me. It would be good if > the e-mail for (1) is posted here (either before or after sending but > preferably before). Is Ezio being asked to let him know about (1) > through (4) or to actually do (1)? To make the e-mail official, it > should say it is being sent on behalf of this group or be signed by > more than one person and CC more than one core dev. > > Also, for the record I never meant to defend Anatoly and don't > personally believe he can be redeemed. I just felt he should be > officially warned as a matter of process. Also, I admit that I was > wrong in implying that he didn't disrespect the group or community. > His recent e-mail about Eric's project was terrible. It was more how > I felt personally because there is a point at which you start > disregarding and not taking seriously anything a person says (he is > past that point). The point about new people who don't have that > understanding yet is a very good one. > > --Chris > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers From brian at python.org Fri Dec 28 23:24:31 2012 From: brian at python.org (Brian Curtin) Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 16:24:31 -0600 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 4:15 PM, John Benediktsson wrote: > I would caution against using hypothetical "new people" (that maybe possibly could be offended in some way that might create harm either to that person or the community) as a reason for taking this action. Does anyone know if this has actually occurred? And in any significant numbers? > > I see a group of hard working core developers that are frustrated quite legitimately and struggling with policing the content of official message boards, but that energy might push you in directions that are more harmful than not. > > Be sure of who you are acting against, the person more than the emails. There is strong incidence of mental illness in the tech community and there are also persons with significantly different email personalities than actual personality. I didn't actually "meet" him so to speak, he just spoke at me and a group of others...so it was no different than what typically occurred via email/tracker. From solipsis at pitrou.net Fri Dec 28 23:45:15 2012 From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou) Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 23:45:15 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: <1356734715.3290.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> Le vendredi 28 d?cembre 2012 ? 22:15 +0000, John Benediktsson a ?crit : > Be sure of who you are acting against, the person more than the > emails. There is strong incidence of mental illness in the tech > community and there are also persons with significantly different > email personalities than actual personality. > > I see Anatoly as someone who isn't a mean person but might not be a > proper communicator. The question is not whether Anatoly is mean or ill-motivated, or what his "actual" personality is, but whether his online behaviour should be perpetually accepted. Anatoly has often been disruptive, taking up precious contributor time for petty controversies. Perhaps ideally there's a way to make Anatoly aware of his communication problems and help him change for the better, but so far nobody's been able to achieve that. Regards Antoine. From brett at python.org Sat Dec 29 01:21:48 2012 From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon) Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 19:21:48 -0500 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: On Dec 28, 2012 4:38 PM, "Chris Jerdonek" wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Chris Jerdonek < chris.jerdonek at gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:28 AM, R. David Murray > >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On 12/25/2012 5:56 PM, ?ukasz Langa wrote: > >> >> > I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely > >> >> > without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the > >> >> > future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if > >> >> > only for transparency reasons. > >> >> > >> >> This strike me as over-reaction. > >> > > >> > I'm not at all sure that it is, but that "most likely" had better be > >> > replaced by "most certainly". Such a policy needs to rest on > >> > fundamental > >> > principles. "Bad cases make bad law", so one must be careful not to > >> > craft a policy to deal only with a specific egregious thing, but rather > >> > craft something that will serve well in the general cases. > >> > Specifically, > >> > any such policy, and any statement made if we take action on Anatoly, > >> > will > >> > have to address the inevitable calls that we are engaging in censorship. > >> > There are principled answers to that charge, but we must decide which > >> > of them we are following and why, and articulate that clearly and > >> > consistently. > >> > >> +1. It might seem bureaucratic to some, but I think grounding actions > >> in due process and documented policy is important. The Diversity > >> Statement is a good example of this. (That statement has a different > >> purpose though. It's more about something we want rather than how to > >> handle something we don't want.): > >> > >> http://www.python.org/community/diversity/ > >> > >> What is CoC by the way? > > > > > > Code of Conduct. > > > > -Brett > > > >> > >> > >> > As an aside, it has occurred to me that the fundamental problem here is > >> > that we do not feel that Anatoly respects *us*. So it is no wonder that > >> > we are offended and do not respect him. > >> > >> FWIW, I've found him to be more what I'd call spammy/annoying and > >> lacking in some areas rather than disrespectful (opening many issues > >> with vague descriptions, starting more than his share of threads on > >> python-ideas, etc). So I've never felt offended. Granted, I'm > >> relatively new to being involved and don't follow him closely. I > >> quickly learned to pass over most of what he writes for lack of time. > >> It's a source of amazement to me that what he writes sometimes leads > >> to something productive. > > > > > > This is where I disagree with everyone who is defending Anatoly as someone > > who can be redeemed and given yet another chance to allow him to continue to > > poison the community where he participates because he is just "annoying". On > > python-dev I checked my email on Xmas morning to an email from Anatoly where > > he said "What should I do in case Eric lost interest after his GSoC project > > for PSF appeared as useless for python-dev community". That is not > > "spammy/annoying" but flat-out disrespectful and rude. > > > > I think I was the first person to publicly state I put Anatoly's email into > > the trash after he publicly said the PSF board should be completely > > disbanded and we should restructure the PSF because he viewed it as > > worthless. That was not annoying but disrespectful. > > > > We have spent **years** trying to get him to be more productive and yet he > > manages to not to. He flat-out refuses to sign any contributor agreement and > > expects us to do all the work and gets mad when we don't spend our free time > > fixing what he wants us to. He won't even search the internet for prior > > discussions as David has pointed out. That's not annoying but disrespectful. > > > > I fully understand that we are all nice people and don't want to do anything > > drastic, but simply ignoring him doesn't solve the issue for new people to > > the community who come to python-ideas, python-dev, or even the tracker on > > occasion and actually take the time to read his emails, reply, etc. and > > don't realize that a decent chunk of core developers never even see their > > responses as the entire thread has already been deleted/muted in the core > > dev's inbox. If I was new and spent some time replying to a thread only to > > find out that the person was being ignored and thus my hard work as well I > > would be frustrated. > > > > In order to deal with this, here is my proposal that should placate those of > > us calling for a ban now and those that feel like there has not been enough > > of a warning ((I can't communicate with him because I want him banned and I > > personally don't get along with him even in person, so any place where > > someone should talk to him it can't be me in the name of fairness to the > > process): > > > > 1. Someone emails Anatoly to tell him he is on indefinite probation for his > > behaviour where it is pointed out he can no longer insult anyone (including > > the PSF), he can't re-open issues without an explicit solution to the > > problem for why it closed, and in general has to just behave and not be rude > > > > 2. We agree to point out to him nicely and calmly when he has screwed up and > > overstepped his bounds while on this probation and to record when that > > happened (an email here about any incident should be enough) so that he can > > learn from his mistakes > > > > 3. If we do not see a pattern of improvement (this can be noticed by anyone > > and I'm sure we can get a consensus on it; unanimity is not required because > > that is impossible for anything with a group of our size), he gets cut off > > from the resource he is abusing the most and those cut-offs will continue on > > other locations if he does not improve there as well > > > > 4. If it goes as far as he is cut off and he manages to get the point and > > behaves elsewhere he can be allowed back on to where he has been banned > > after a year has passed (IOW he has to show actual improvement) > > > > Three key points in this proposal. One is that he gets an official warning; > > no more side discussions with core devs, no more "does he know people want > > to ban him" questions as it will be clear and explicit. He will be flat-out > > told his attitude and actions are not acceptable as they stand and they need > > to change. > > > > Two is that there is no time limit so that he doesn't just hide away for > > e.g. six months, comes back, and then starts stirring up trouble while > > saying he behaved within the allotted time that he had to. Any change needs > > to be permanent and perpetuate forever. > > > > Three, the cut-offs are gradual per resource so that it isn't an > > over-arching nuclear option. > > > > I say Ezio lets him know that this is the plan since he talked to him > > recently and is in the no-ban-yet camp. But even if people don't like the > > explicit steps as I have outlined them as a general rule, someone who > > doesn't want him banned should tell him flat-out that he is on thin ice as I > > am an admin for python-ideas and this plan is what I will institute starting > > January 1 for that list and he is on the top of the list of people who will > > be in trouble if their attitude does not change (I am about to email Titus > > about drafting up a CoC for python-ideas so that this applies to everyone, > > not just Anatoly). > > Thanks, Brett. These steps sound great to me. It would be good if > the e-mail for (1) is posted here (either before or after sending but > preferably before). Is Ezio being asked to let him know about (1) > through (4) or to actually do (1)? To make the e-mail official, it > should say it is being sent on behalf of this group or be signed by > more than one person and CC more than one core dev. > It doesn't matter to me who writes the email. I was not thinking so formally, bit it wouldn't hurt. -brett > Also, for the record I never meant to defend Anatoly and don't > personally believe he can be redeemed. I just felt he should be > officially warned as a matter of process. Also, I admit that I was > wrong in implying that he didn't disrespect the group or community. > His recent e-mail about Eric's project was terrible. It was more how > I felt personally because there is a point at which you start > disregarding and not taking seriously anything a person says (he is > past that point). The point about new people who don't have that > understanding yet is a very good one. > > --Chris -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From martin at v.loewis.de Sun Dec 30 00:30:19 2012 From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=) Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 00:30:19 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: <50DF7D0B.2000806@v.loewis.de> Am 26.12.12 14:28, schrieb R. David Murray: > I wonder if a public discussion aimed at developing such a policy > would clue Anatoly in (probably not). I wonder what other communities > have done. Wrt. anatoly techtonik? I don't know (beyond episodal knowledge with Rietveld and Roundup) In general for this kind of behavior: I still think he fits the description in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q52kFL8zVoM&feature=gv I think he is poisenous to the Python project. If you haven't seen the video, please watch it all. Regards, Martin From martin at v.loewis.de Sun Dec 30 00:35:15 2012 From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=) Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 00:35:15 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> Message-ID: <50DF7E33.3020208@v.loewis.de> Am 26.12.12 15:09, schrieb Ezio Melotti: > I don't think anyone should be banned from the tracker or from the MLs > unless their actions are intentionally destructive (e.g. flooders/spammers). > This is not the case for anatoly, so in my opinion we should not take > this kind of action against him. I disagree. Being destructive is enough to take action - even being destructive unintentionally cannot be tolerated (at least if this is ongoing, instead of occasional mistakes). > The community should ignore the tone of the messages or even the > messages themselves and most importantly avoid replies that convey the > same negative feelings. I'm happy to ignore him on mailing lists (and have done so for some time). On the bug tracker, I cannot ignore when he reopens issues or resubmits new duplicate issues. Regards, Martin From martin at v.loewis.de Sun Dec 30 00:50:11 2012 From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=) Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 00:50:11 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> Message-ID: <50DF81B3.6040505@v.loewis.de> Am 29.12.12 01:21, schrieb Brett Cannon: > It doesn't matter to me who writes the email. I was not thinking so > formally, bit it wouldn't hurt. So has any action been taken? If not, I'll communicate it to him. I'm personally worried most about the tracker, so I'd propose the policy - he must not reopen any issues. If he really thinks important information was not considered, he can post them to the closed issue. - he must not resubmit a duplicate of one of his closed issues. Regards, Martin From ezio.melotti at gmail.com Sun Dec 30 01:14:10 2012 From: ezio.melotti at gmail.com (Ezio Melotti) Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 02:14:10 +0200 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <50DF81B3.6040505@v.loewis.de> References: <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> <50DF81B3.6040505@v.loewis.de> Message-ID: Hi, On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 1:50 AM, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote: > Am 29.12.12 01:21, schrieb Brett Cannon: > > > It doesn't matter to me who writes the email. I was not thinking so > > formally, bit it wouldn't hurt. > > So has any action been taken? I haven't talked with him again yet. If I don't get a chance to do it in the following days I'll write him an email. > If not, I'll communicate it to him. I'm > personally worried most about the tracker, so I'd propose the policy > - he must not reopen any issues. If he really thinks important > information was not considered, he can post them to the closed issue. > - he must not resubmit a duplicate of one of his closed issues. > > I think I mentioned this last time we talked, and I'll make sure to make it clearer next time. Best Regards, Ezio Melotti > Regards, > Martin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chris.jerdonek at gmail.com Sun Dec 30 01:23:27 2012 From: chris.jerdonek at gmail.com (Chris Jerdonek) Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 16:23:27 -0800 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> <50DF81B3.6040505@v.loewis.de> Message-ID: On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Ezio Melotti wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 1:50 AM, "Martin v. L?wis" > wrote: >> >> Am 29.12.12 01:21, schrieb Brett Cannon: >> >> > It doesn't matter to me who writes the email. I was not thinking so >> > formally, bit it wouldn't hurt. >> >> So has any action been taken? > > > I haven't talked with him again yet. If I don't get a chance to do it in > the following days I'll write him an email. I think it's important that this be done in the form of an official e-mail as Brett originally suggested, so that it's clear to everyone what was said and is not just another side discussion. --Chris > >> >> If not, I'll communicate it to him. I'm >> personally worried most about the tracker, so I'd propose the policy >> - he must not reopen any issues. If he really thinks important >> information was not considered, he can post them to the closed issue. >> - he must not resubmit a duplicate of one of his closed issues. >> > > I think I mentioned this last time we talked, and I'll make sure to make it > clearer next time. > > Best Regards, > Ezio Melotti > > >> >> Regards, >> Martin > > > > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers > From meadori at gmail.com Sun Dec 30 20:04:57 2012 From: meadori at gmail.com (Meador Inge) Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:04:57 -0600 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: <50DF7D0B.2000806@v.loewis.de> References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> <50DF7D0B.2000806@v.loewis.de> Message-ID: On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 5:30 PM, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote: > Am 26.12.12 14:28, schrieb R. David Murray: > >> I wonder if a public discussion aimed at developing such a policy >> would clue Anatoly in (probably not). I wonder what other communities >> have done. > > > Wrt. anatoly techtonik? I don't know (beyond episodal knowledge with > Rietveld and Roundup) > > In general for this kind of behavior: I still think he fits the description > in > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q52kFL8zVoM&feature=gv > > I think he is poisenous to the Python project. If you haven't > seen the video, please watch it all. Interesting watch. Thank you for posting it. The first point from that talk that fits the bill extremely well is: Lack of Cooperation * WIlling to complain, but not help fix anything The second point that I found particularly applicable is: Disinfecting your community * Is this person draining attention and focus? * Is this person paralyzing the project? I say 'yes' for the first and 'no' for the second. Although his behavior is very draining I wouldn't go as far to say it is "paralyzing" (i.e. preventing significant amounts of work from being accomplished). In any case, I think David's original point is a good one. It is nice to have some documented community principles to point to. -- # Meador From victor.stinner at gmail.com Sun Dec 30 22:59:59 2012 From: victor.stinner at gmail.com (Victor Stinner) Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 22:59:59 +0100 Subject: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution In-Reply-To: References: <509A4EB1.2070506@v.loewis.de> <08E61C8D-F36E-4AB0-8BE0-E3C57746D030@langa.pl> <75b44c1a96f6a4f04db5c2e6afc43d11.squirrel@webmail.nerim.net> <01BB2D44-15E1-4006-82D0-F0B27D688B78@langa.pl> <50DAA8E8.5000900@udel.edu> <20121226132824.26C762500B5@webabinitio.net> <50DF7D0B.2000806@v.loewis.de> Message-ID: 2012/12/30 Meador Inge : > * WIlling to complain, but not help fix anything > * Is this person draining attention and focus? > * Is this person paralyzing the project? I don't understand how Anatoly plans to help Python with such project: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2012-December/018339.html "Documenting Python warts on Stack Overflow" I'm not sure that I understood correctly his idea, but it sounds very negative to me. (I didn't know the english word "wart". It's not something positive according to Wikipedia.) Anatoly is poisoning the Python project because he's flooding quite all communication channels used by Python developers with his ideas. How a new developer learning Python will react when he sees such email? Does it mean that the Python language sucks and is full of bugs or traps? Victor