Alexandre Vassalotti wrote: > On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 5:00 AM Antoine Pitrou anto...@python.org... wrote: > > So, how do we > > pull together a clean-enough list of historical core > > developers? Here is my idea of criteria of people to be on the list > > (based on the developer log and the git log): > > > > Was not a GSoC student (clarification to follow for those who fall > > into this category and are actually active) > > > > I think you should replace "are actually active" with "have been > > actually active after their GSoC project" (without necessary being > > active now). Example with Alexandre, who's been the pickle maintainer > > during several years but is inactive now: > > Oh, I'm not inactive (at least not by the definition in PEP 13 > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0013/#id18....)
To clarify and try to prevent this from coming up again: what I'm talking about has nothing to do with active/inactive at this moment or in terms of PEP 13 (I purposely didn't use those terms in my initial email). > I was part of the > initial active core team members who were grandfathered in from the "Python > core" team on GitHub, and nobody asked me to declare myself as inactive > (yet!) But outside of the PEP 13 definition, yeah, it is true that I am not > actively contributing right now. (I still read the mailing lists and still > keep an eye on the pickle module though.) I would be sad to see my > membership invalidated because I became a committer through GSoC. You're fine. As I said, if you speak up you've probably done enough to warrant being considered more than a GSoC student. :) This is for people who were GSoC students who only participated within the confines of their project and then walked away or committed twice, 12 months apart for whatever reason (and that is a real-life example, BTW). You stuck around and so I don't think anyone would argue you weren't a core dev. :) Please don't get hung up on how you came into becoming a core dev as much as whether you continued participating at some point in Python's history. (Remember, this isn't about _now_, it's about _ever_.) > And BTW, PEP 13 defined the initial inactive members as anyone who has been > a committer in the past. PEP 13 didn't qualify the membership on what > process the person went through become a committer (e.g., by a vote, for > GSoC, or for sprints). Brett, are you planning to propose an amendment to > PEP 13 to change that? The list of folks "who [have] been a committer in the past" isn't even known beyond the spelunking I've done so it's already a hand-wavy definition to begin with. We also talked about trying to clean this list up prior to voting on governance models but no one had the time or patience to try and discuss it, probably due to fears of being accused of possible disenfranchisement. But if people want PEP 13 to be updated to say "the folks on this list kept over _here_ are core team members and here is how we created that list" then I can do that when we are done with this discussion. _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list -- python-committers@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-committers-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-committers.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-committers@python.org/message/3T3F5UU3LR3K3HWCQ7FOX7NNMYZFOA5B/ Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
