On 02.05.2017 04:25, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 2 May 2017 at 08:32, Christian Heimes <christ...@python.org> wrote: >> This brings me to my questions >> >> 1) Should we try to move discussion back to BPO or are we fine with >> having major decisions just in Github PRs? >> >> 2) How can we retain enough information on BPO to keep it useful as >> research database for past decisions? > > It's OK to have the discussions on GitHub, but one of the > responsibilities of reviewers is to ensure that significant design > decisions are summarised on the related tracker issue for future > reference.
I don't think that's a good idea, since the core devs then have to check what's good discussion to have on Github PRs and what not. IMO, it's much easier for everyone to just always point people to BPO for discussions and keep PRs reserved for code reviews. -- Marc-Andre Lemburg eGenix.com Professional Python Services directly from the Experts (#1, May 02 2017) >>> Python Projects, Coaching and Consulting ... http://www.egenix.com/ >>> Python Database Interfaces ... http://products.egenix.com/ >>> Plone/Zope Database Interfaces ... http://zope.egenix.com/ ________________________________________________________________________ ::: We implement business ideas - efficiently in both time and costs ::: eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH Pastor-Loeh-Str.48 D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611 http://www.egenix.com/company/contact/ http://www.malemburg.com/ _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
