[Python-Dev] Two small PEP ideas

[Guido van Rossum]

On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Raymond Hettinger
<raymond.hettinger at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 30, 2010, at 12:51 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> Without a BDFL, I think we need a committee to make decisions, e.g. by
>> majority vote amongst committers.
>
> I like Guido's idea.  Just appoint have one of the experienced developers
> who is independent of the proposal and have them be the final arbiter.
> For example, Guido had earlier suggested that I decide the fate of the
> "yield from" proposal because I had experience in the topic but was not
> not personally involved in the proposal.
>
> Guido has set a good example for others to follow:
> * let a conversation evolve until an outcome is self-evident
> * or kill it early if it has no chance
> * or if discussion teases out all of the meaningful thinking
>   but doesn't reach a clear conclusion, just make a choice
>   based on instinct
> * have biases toward real-world use cases, towards ideas proven in
>   other languages (category killers),  towards slow rates of language
>   evolution, and think about the long-term.
>
> It is better to have one experienced developer decide than to have
> a committee.

+1.

BTW, Barry just asked me about PEP 3149 and we decided to leave the
ultimate decision to Georg and Benjamin. That's about as large a
committee I'd be comfortable to appoint for any specific PEP.

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)