Do you QA your Python? Was: 2.1 vs. 2.2

[Paul Rubin]

Tim Peters <tim.one at comcast.net> writes:
> It's in the nature of open source development that volunteers scratch their
> own itches, then share what they've done because it does them good too to
> have their work widely adopted.  If you can ride that curve, you can get an
> enormous amount of high-quality work for free.  If not, you'll have to pay
> for it or go without.

A lot of stuff gets done because it needs to get done, rather than
scratch an itch.  

> A crushing amount of debate over "stability" has gone by on Python-Dev the
> last week, and the one thing that strikes me over and over is that, with
> just a few minor exceptions, nobody volunteers to *do* anything except tell
> other people what to do.  What are you willing to do to make your desires a
> reality?  If it doesn't involve contributing work, time or money, you just
> want a free ride.  But nobody owes anyone a free ride, and open source can't
> change that fact of life either.

In that particular debate, a lot of people were asking for certain new
features to be LEFT OUT of Python.  I don't understand how someone can
volunteer to contribute work, time, or money toward leaving something out.