> On Nov 24, 2014, at 8:59 PM, Ethan Furman <et...@stoneleaf.us> wrote: > > On 11/24/2014 08:36 AM, Donald Stufft wrote: >> On Nov 24, 2014, at 11:28 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: >>> >>> This might be a little controversial, but the PSF's mission should not >>> influence a decision of python-dev. > > Yet what we do can reinforce, or undermine, the PSF. > > >>> The only reason we didn't go with Jira for our issue tracker was because of >>> pressure to not go with a closed-source >>> solution [...] > >> This is really what I’m trying to do but I’m apparently not getting my point >> across very well. I want us to pick the >> best tool for the job regardless of what language it’s written in. > > As an open source project it behooves us to support open source solutions, > even if a "better" closed-source solution exists. > > It is sounding to me like GitHub is not, itself, an open solution, even > though they may support open source.
I’d agree if the tooling was comparable, but at the end of the day the closed source tool is better and more popular. It isn’t Python’s job to fall on the sword in the name of some greater ideology while other languages get to pick the tooling that best enables them to serve the faith that their users have put in them. “Practicality beats Purity” after all. You might lament the fact that the closed source tool is the better option, but the right response to that is to make an OSS alternative that is more, or at least as, compelling as the closed source solution and then market that and win. --- Donald Stufft PGP: 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
