[Python-ideas] Proposal: Moratorium on Python language changes

[Nick Coghlan]

geremy condra wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 1:33 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm a little unclear on what you're driving at here-
> my goal is to keep these projects off the minds
> of the core devs until they're about ready to go, to
> make it easy for all the implementors to carefully
> assess both the features themselves and the
> code used to implement them as they near that
> point, and to make certain that there is a common
> point of reference for the debate over inclusion
> afterwards. In other words, not specifically to
> remove python-dev from the process, but rather
> to allow it to spend its time more productively
> elsewhere until it can be usefully spent there.

Having an "official sandbox" is completely irrelevant (and probably
counterproductive) if core development is happening in a DVCS. If people
want to experiment, they will be able to experiment by branching into
their own repository. Trying to create an "official sandbox" (or, more
likely, use the existing sandbox) defeats the whole point of the
exercise, since it just brings the CPython admins back into the loop and
will generate a pile of irrelevant traffic on python-checkins.

In short, a moratorium that said "we won't accept things into trunk, but
you can still pester us to add things to our official sandbox" would be
a pointless exercise.

Moving to a DVCS, putting a core language change moratorium in place for
a few years, then looking to see what improvements have been developed
outside the core tree as the moratorium is running down (and what
feedback has been received over that time) would be far more sensible.

Cheers,
Nick.


-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------