On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 5:26 PM Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: [..] > Now we have to figure that out: the legitimacy of any new governance > system is ultimately going to have to rest on the consensus of the > core devs. The only way I know to get that is by taking the time to > work through the difficult conversations. If these deadlines just > encourage people to keep moving and engaging, then that's great. But I > worry that if we impose a cut-off like this up front, then we'll take > that as an excuse to skip doing that work, because there's no time, > and if someone disagrees it's easier to vote than to actually engage > and work it out.
+1. I don't like this idea of having strict deadlines that we must follow no matter what. IMO it would be better to set a "recommended date" (Oct 1st is fine) for submitting governance proposals. We can start discussing them publicly after Oct 1st, and will set a strict deadline for voting when we are all comfortable. Yury _______________________________________________ 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/
