[Python-Dev] Workflow PEP proposals are now closed

Brett Cannon bcannon at gmail.com
Mon Feb 2 15:35:47 CET 2015


The PEPs under consideration are PEPs 474
<https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0474/> and 462
<https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0462/> from Nick Coghlan to use
Kallithea and do self-hosting, and PEP 481
<https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0481/> from Donald Stufft that
proposes using GitHub.

At this point I expect final PEPs by PyCon US so I can try and make a
decision by May 1. Longer still is to hopefully have whatever solution we
choose in place right after Python 3.5 is released.

And just a reminder to people, the lofty goal is to improve the overall
workflow for CPython itself such that our patch submission queue can
actually be cleared regularly. This not only benefits core devs by letting
us be more effective, but also contributors by making sure their hard work
gets addressed quickly and thus doesn't languish on the issue tracker for
very long.

If we can't find a solution for fixing our CPython workflow I will then be
willing to entertain these PEPs narrowing their scopes and only focus on
ancillary repos like the devguide, etc. where the workflows are simple.

I know the absolute worst case is nothing changes, but honestly I think the
worst case is Nick's work gets us off of Rietveld, the ancillary repos move
to GitHub, and we make the GitHub and Bitbucket mirrors of CPython official
ones for people to work from (bonus points if we get the issue tracker to
have push button patch pulling from GitHub; Bitbucket is already covered
thanks to our remote hg repo support). IOW I see nothing but a win for
contributors and core devs as well as everyone proposing solutions which is
a nice place to start from. =)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20150202/cb50cee0/attachment.html>


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list