On 25Mar2019 1503, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
On 25.03.2019 16:20, Steve Dower wrote:
To be clear, my pushback (on Discourse, since I can only send email from
an actual laptop these days but can participate over there from my
phone) has been against vague nominations, not the individuals themselves.
I'm *very* concerned about the perception of commit rights being
"awarded" rather than being a added responsibility specific to CPython.
I'm not sure where you got that perception from. The two candidates
both want to actively contribute to Python.
It's possible that the nominations did not emphasize this enough, but
that's an issue with the nomination text, not with the person being
nominated.
That's literally what I said.
Yet, the public perception of the discussion is that the persons are
not qualified enough and that's definitely not going to have a
productive effect on getting more people helping.
I don't know where you got *this* from. I haven't seen any criticism of
the candidates themselves - just questions that ought to have been
answered very easily in the nomination (and were answered almost
immediately upon request).
Isn't this what's been happening? It certainly has been on Discourse.
Not really. I'm not talking about some moderator having to step
in to take action. I'm talking about the nominators actively
supporting the discussion by fixing mistakes in the nomination,
proxying and adding more information (since the candidates cannot
speak for themselves) and helping to clarify misconceptions.
Um, that's exactly what happened? I don't understand why you're saying
it didn't (unless someone's edited the history over there between me
reading it and you reading it).
Asking people who have voted -1 or +1 to publicly tell the world why
they did so is not helpful in this respect, since it just creates bias.
What people, who are unsure how to vote, really need, is more
information, not bias.
This is illogical. Knowing how and why certain people voted is useful
information when you know that person (and it's also why we generally
use options like -1, -0, +0, +1, and sometimes +/-100 ;) ). Without this
added information, the *only* thing we have is bias, and I don't think
we have a big enough group to average out individual bias in such
important decisions as this.
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
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/
