[Python-ideas] PEP feedback loop (with tracker account)

[anatoly techtonik]

On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Andrew Barnert <abarnert at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 25, 2014, at 15:46, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
>>
>> No.  What is useful is to keep the "Post-History" header up to
>> date, which refers people to the python-dev threads where all the
>> discussion and "voting" takes place.
>>
>> I could also imagine adding direct links to the archive; however
>> many PEPs already add references in the text where appropriate.
>
> Having someone dedicate themselves to linking in all significant -ideas and -dev discussions (and relevant blog posts, etc.) would be incredibly useful.

The goal to link threads and PEP versions is reachable at the next
iteration once status per person is implemented. The benefit from
the system is that you don't need to dedicate a person to do this.

> A +/- vote is meaningless, and expecting people to summarize their mailing-list discussions in a single post on the PEP site doesn't seem likely to capture sufficient interest on any but the most contentious PEPs.

It is not a post. It is status per revision. The difference between
post and status is that status gives immediate overview (diffstat)
while post needs English skills + time to bring an up-to-date
image in you head. So, status is declarative and can be processed
by machines. Post is procedural and requires manual human labor.

Status can serve as intermediate entrypoint to join current problem
field (as opposed to rereading posts from the start).
-- 
anatoly t.