[Python-Dev] Issues with Py3.1's new ipaddr

[Paul Moore]

2009/6/3 Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org>:
> Aahz writes:
>
>  > On Tue, Jun 02, 2009, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>  > >
>  > > I hope we can learn from this.
>  >
>  > I'm not thrilled with adding more process just because we had a problem
>  > here, and the only obvious solution I see is to require a PEP every time
>  > a module is added.  Based on what I've seen of this discussion so far, I
>  > think that cure would at this time be worse than the disease.
>
> +1
[...]
>
> One thing I would recommend is that while inclusion is not a matter of
> voting, people who are recognized as domain experts on Python-Dev
> *should* try to add their "+1" or "-1" early.  Especially if they
> don't expect to have time to participate actively in discussion.
>
> After all, they can always change their assessment based on either
> changes or as a response to a persuasive lobby, precisely because it's
> not a vote.

FWIW, I'd add some points:

1. Publishing the documentation somewhere prominent would help. I
don't know if that happened here, but it makes it a *lot* easier for
people to "have a quick look". Downloading a zip file, unpacking the
docs and opening a HTML file (or worse still, building it first!) can
be enough of a barrier to stop people who are pressed for time from
commenting. (Once the module was included, it gets into the online
Python docs, hence I could read them and comment).

2. Encouraging a clear +1/-1 from people, in addition to discussion on
specific points, would clarify things. I believe Martin commented that
he hadn't realised that one of the opposing comments was a strong
enough objection to count as a -1.

3. Discussion should happen on python-dev, not on the tracker. (Some
people may object to this, I know). I saw the call for input to the
tracker item, and thought "that's not a module I'm likely to need,
I'll leave it to the experts" and did nothing more. When the
discussion flared up on python-dev, on the other hand, I kept skimming
the discussion, and when I saw something that seemed at my level, I
felt encouraged to comment. Also, seeing that there *was* disagreement
encouraged me to comment - if the experts aren't agreeing, maybe my
non-expert view might be helpful input on usability/intuitiveness.

But I agree, let's not add more process if a bit of focus in the
discussion is enough.

Paul.