[Python-Dev] Move selected documentation repos to PSF BitBucket account?

[Nick Coghlan]

On 22 Nov 2014 07:37, "Donald Stufft" <donald at stufft.io> wrote:
> > On Nov 21, 2014, at 3:59 PM, Ned Deily <nad at acm.org> wrote:
> > Sure, I get that.  But we're not even talking here about the main Python
> > docs since they are part of the CPython repos, only ancillary repos like
> > PEPs and the developer's guide.  The level of activity on those is quite
> > small.  So, thinking about it a bit more, PEPs don't normally have bug
> > tracker issues associated with them so I suppose my concerns about issue
> > tracker aren't a major concern for them.  The dev guide does get issues
> > opened about it and I suppose they could be managed.  But, without
> > tackling the CPython repo workflow (a *much* bigger deal), is the
> > divergence in workflows worth it?  I dunno.

I also think the tutorial and howto guides should be broken out of the main
CPython repo &  made version independent (with internal version specific
notes).

That offers no compelling advantages right now, but becomes far more
beneficial if it comes with a switch to enabling online editing.

> Yea for the smaller repositories I don’t have a whole lot of opinion
> about if the benefit buys us much, especially since one of the goals
> is new-person friendliness but the problem is that it doesn’t translate
> to contributing to CPython itself.

OK, different question. Has anyone here actually even *read* the workflow
PEPs I wrote? They were on the agenda for the language summit, but got
bumped due to lack of time (which I'm still annoyed about, given the
comparatively inconsequential things that chewed up a whole lot of the day).

I've only had a couple of folks from outside the core dev community express
interest in them. Personally, the lack of online editing support annoys me
immensely whenever I need to work on PEPs or the devguide. I also think
it's ridiculous that we have dozens (hundreds?) of folks running community
workshops, and all creating their own custom documentation, rather than us
finding a way to better enable their collaboration on the official tutorial.

The BitBucket proposal in this thread came out of a desire to avoid adding
yet more work to an understaffed group of primarily volunteers maintaining
the infrastructure (the paid admins are more focused on incident response
and general infrastructure support, rather than spinning up new workflow
services).

My preferred answer remains setting up a srlf-hosted forge.python.org, but
I've seen little evidence we have the capacity to deploy & maintain such a
service effectively, given the relative lack of interest shown in the idea
by almost everyone I've spoken to about it. Any progress has only come with
a lot of pushing from me, and I just don't have the personal bandwidth to
sustain that at this point. That's why the related PEPs were deferred, and
the only responses I've received regarding potentially taking them over
have come from folks outside the core development community, which really
doesn't help very much in removing my availability as a bottleneck in the
workflow improvement process.

If nobody wants to maintain a self-hosted forge, or even enable the folks
that have expressed interest in setting it up & maintaining it, then the
right answer is "don't do it" - we should use a commercial service instead.

Regards,
Nick.

>
> ---
> Donald Stufft
> PGP: 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/ncoghlan%40gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20141123/1b1dd9f8/attachment.html>