Re: [python-committers] Organizing an informational PEP on project governance options (was Re: Transfer of power)

[Nathaniel Smith]

I'm sorry, I seem to have accidentally licked a cookie [1] here. I'm still
keen to see this happen and to be a part of it, and have been trying to be
find the spoons to take the lead on organizing, but it's been a few weeks
now and that hasn't happened yet [2].

Does anyone else want to take the lead here? A number of people have
expressed interest in helping or in making introductions to other
communities, and I think the next step would be to organize some kind of
kick off meeting to rough out an outline and start divvying up work.

-n

[1] http://communitymgt.wikia.com/wiki/Cookie_Licking
[2] not to go into too many details, but basically I'm currently sick,
unemployed, and broke, which isn't a crisis but sorting it out is sucking
up a lot of energy.

On Jul 13, 2018 04:31, "Nathaniel Smith"  wrote:

On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 6:35 PM, Łukasz Langa  wrote:
> I'm +1 to an Informational PEP around the state of the art in project
governance.

I think this is a great idea. There's a lot of experience out there on
different governance models, but of course any given project only uses
one of them, so knowledge about what works and what doesn't is pretty
fragmented across the F/OSS community. And this is a really important
decision for us and our users, so we should do due diligence. For
example, we should think this through at least as carefully as we
thought through Github vs. Gitlab :-). A PEP is a good format to start
doing that.

I volunteer to co-author such a PEP. But I'm not up to doing it on my
own. So... who else wants to be a co-author? (I'm not going to
pressure anyone, but Brett, Mariatta, and Carol, please know that your
names were the first ones that jumped to my mind when thinking about
this :-).)

What I'm thinking:

- While this might eventually produce some recommendations, the
immediate goal would just be to collect together different options and
ideas and point out their trade-offs. I'm guessing most core devs
aren't interested in becoming experts on open-source governance, so
the goal here would be to help the broader community get up to speed
and have a more informed discussion [1].

- As per the general PEP philosophy, I think this is best done by
having some amount of general discussion on
python-dev/python-committers, plus a small group of coauthors (say 2-4
people) who take responsibility for filtering ideas and organizing
them in a coherent document.

- Places where we'll want to look for ideas:
  - The thread already happening on python-committers
  - Whatever books / articles / blog posts / etc. we can find (e.g. I
know Karl Fogel's Producing OSS book has some good discussion)
  - Other major projects in a similar position to CPython (e.g.,
node.js, Rust) -- what do they do, and what parts are they
happy/not-happy about?
  - Large Python projects (e.g. Django) -- likewise

If you have suggestions for particularly interesting projects or
excellent writing on the topic, then this thread would be a good place
to mention them.

-n

[1] The NumPy project has put a lot of energy into working through
governance issues over the last few years, and one thing that
definitely helped was coming up with some "assigned reading" ahead of
the main sprint where we talked about this. NumPy's problems are/were
pretty different from CPython's, but I'm imagining this PEP as filling
a similar role.


-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
___
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/

Re: [python-committers] List of all core developers

[Stefan Richthofer]

> Hmm, I don't think it is should be our (CPython) responsibility to keep
> track and maintain the list of the core devs of alternate Python
> implementations. Don't they have their own community / website? They have
> their own repo, bug tracker, governance model, and everything, right?
>

Core developers of Python implementations under PSF ownership were
traditionally listed in committers.txt and developer log.
This includes at least PyPy, Jython and IronPython. If you want to propose
to change this, that should be a distinct discussion
I suppose. I don't know the reason why it was originally decided to
maintain this together, but I guess that the named lists are
more a PSF thing than a CPython thing.
If you intend to change this suddenly, the communities should get at least
some transition time. I only know the situation of Jython,
where no committers list is available. Currently it relies on the lists
named above to identify committers.


Stefan


2018-08-02 2:32 GMT+02:00 Mariatta Wijaya :

> I think it would also be a good idea to include core developers
>> of other Python implementations in such a document, in
>> separate sections, e.g. for Jython, IronPython, PyPy,
>> Stackless, etc
>
>
> Hmm, I don't think it is should be our (CPython) responsibility to keep
> track and maintain the list of the core devs of alternate Python
> implementations. Don't they have their own community / website? They have
> their own repo, bug tracker, governance model, and everything, right?
>
> Mariatta
>
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 2:54 PM Eric Snow 
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 3:44 PM M.-A. Lemburg  wrote:
>> > On 01.08.2018 23:28, Mariatta Wijaya wrote:
>> > > See also an open issue to revamp the Developer log:
>> > > https://github.com/python/devguide/issues/390
>> > >
>> > > Someone has also said that they're working on tracking down the
>> dormant
>> > > core devs, but now I can't find that email.
>> >
>> > I think the log is fine at it is, since it serves a different
>> > purpose.
>> >
>> > The list should be in addition to the log, not replacing it.
>> >
>> > Resources we already have:
>> >
>> > * https://devguide.python.org/developers/
>> > *
>> > https://bugs.python.org/user?%40action=search=1;
>> %40pagesize=300&%40sort=username
>> > * python-committers Subscribers List (but this is currently only
>> >   for list admins to see - perhaps we could make that available
>> >   to list members ?!)
>> > * https://hg.python.org/committers.txt
>> > * for the early days:
>> >
>> > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/python/cpython/
>> e42b705188271da108de42b55d9344642170aa2b/Misc/HISTORY
>> >   in combination with
>> >
>> > https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/e42b705188271da108de42b55d9344
>> 642170aa2b/Misc/ACKS
>> >   (in those times, there was no direct access to the repo
>> >   and all patches had to go through the team around Guido)
>>
>> There's also:
>>
>> * the members of the github team
>> * folks marked as committers as BPO
>>
>> I don't recall if these are exposed via public lists though.
>>
>> -eric
>>
>> > I think it would also be a good idea to include core developers
>> > of other Python implementations in such a document, in
>> > separate sections, e.g. for Jython, IronPython, PyPy,
>> > Stackless, etc.
>>
>
> ___
> 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/
>
>
___
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/

Re: [python-committers] List of all core developers

[Eric V. Smith]

On 8/1/2018 8:32 PM, Mariatta Wijaya wrote:

I think it would also be a good idea to include core developers
of other Python implementations in such a document, in
separate sections, e.g. for Jython, IronPython, PyPy,
Stackless, etc


Hmm, I don't think it is should be our (CPython) responsibility to keep 
track and maintain the list of the core devs of alternate Python 
implementations. Don't they have their own community / website? They 
have their own repo, bug tracker, governance model, and everything, right?


Agreed. We have a hard enough time keeping track of our own core developers.

For our core devs, can't we just say that the CPython core devs are 
those with commit bits on the CPython repo? I realize that will 
eliminate some people who have been core developers and never moved to 
github, but if they bring it to our attention, we can add them easily 
enough.


Eric
___
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/

Re: [python-committers] Reminder of BDFL succession timeline + CFP

[Yury Selivanov]

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:29 PM Mariatta Wijaya
 wrote:
[..]
> Please don't misunderstand my wanting to set up a deadlines and process as 
> wanting to rush things.

Absolutely, I understand, I didn't want to imply that "[name] is
rushing the process". Sorry if I sounded this way. I do have an
impression, though, that a large population of core devs is OK with
deadlines and the other sizable population doesn't understand why we
need a strict schedule right now.

> I'm open to extend the dates, and even wait another year if we need to.
> Or do folks want to come up with a completely different process than what 
> I've proposed?
>
> In the end, I just want to know whether we will come to decision before 2019, 
> 2020, 2021, 2022, .. ?

IMHO we should tweak the proposal to include just *one date for now*:
we want everybody interested to post their proposals by October 1st
(we can shift it + 2 weeks if people are on vacations right now).

The discussion will inevitably start as soon as we have a couple
proposals on the table.  Some proposals will be withdrawn, some will
require tweaks, people also might come up with new proposals.  We can
then decide what our next steps (and deadlines!) considering what will
be the outcome of these first debates.

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/

Re: [python-committers] List of all core developers

[Mariatta Wijaya]

>
> I think it would also be a good idea to include core developers
> of other Python implementations in such a document, in
> separate sections, e.g. for Jython, IronPython, PyPy,
> Stackless, etc


Hmm, I don't think it is should be our (CPython) responsibility to keep
track and maintain the list of the core devs of alternate Python
implementations. Don't they have their own community / website? They have
their own repo, bug tracker, governance model, and everything, right?

Mariatta

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 2:54 PM Eric Snow 
wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 3:44 PM M.-A. Lemburg  wrote:
> > On 01.08.2018 23:28, Mariatta Wijaya wrote:
> > > See also an open issue to revamp the Developer log:
> > > https://github.com/python/devguide/issues/390
> > >
> > > Someone has also said that they're working on tracking down the dormant
> > > core devs, but now I can't find that email.
> >
> > I think the log is fine at it is, since it serves a different
> > purpose.
> >
> > The list should be in addition to the log, not replacing it.
> >
> > Resources we already have:
> >
> > * https://devguide.python.org/developers/
> > *
> >
> https://bugs.python.org/user?%40action=search=1&%40pagesize=300&%40sort=username
> > * python-committers Subscribers List (but this is currently only
> >   for list admins to see - perhaps we could make that available
> >   to list members ?!)
> > * https://hg.python.org/committers.txt
> > * for the early days:
> >
> >
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/python/cpython/e42b705188271da108de42b55d9344642170aa2b/Misc/HISTORY
> >   in combination with
> >
> >
> https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/e42b705188271da108de42b55d9344642170aa2b/Misc/ACKS
> >   (in those times, there was no direct access to the repo
> >   and all patches had to go through the team around Guido)
>
> There's also:
>
> * the members of the github team
> * folks marked as committers as BPO
>
> I don't recall if these are exposed via public lists though.
>
> -eric
>
> > I think it would also be a good idea to include core developers
> > of other Python implementations in such a document, in
> > separate sections, e.g. for Jython, IronPython, PyPy,
> > Stackless, etc.
>
___
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/

Re: [python-committers] Reminder of BDFL succession timeline + CFP

[Mariatta Wijaya]

>
> IIRC we always promoted core devs by popular vote, so I don't think
> this would be a problem.  Do we have any candidates that are currently
> waiting for us deciding on a governance model?


If this new governance model will include core devs being able to vote on
PEPs, then I will have different opinion on how I want to vote or promote
any new core dev.

And maybe that's OK for a few months? I don't recall Guido ever
> accepting PEPs promptly. :)  Setting strict deadlines really seems
> like a last-resort option.


Please don't misunderstand my wanting to set up a deadlines and process as
wanting to rush things.
I'm open to extend the dates, and even wait another year if we need to.
Or do folks want to come up with a completely different process than what
I've proposed?

In the end, I just want to know whether we will come to decision before
2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, .. ?

Mariatta


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 4:06 PM Yury Selivanov 
wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:44 PM Mariatta Wijaya
>  wrote:
> >
> >
> > Thank you for the responses and concerns.
> >
> > I do want to keep this discussion open and ongoing, and I still think
> that we do need a set deadline on things.
>
> I talked to a few core developers recently (at EuroPython and over
> messengers) and I had an impression that some of them don't like an
> idea of making a decision faster than everybody has a chance to say
> their word.  Some of them are shy to publicly object to having strict
> deadlines, some probably haven't yet seen this thread, some don't have
> time to engage right now. You also see a few -1s in this very thread.
> All in all, I really don't understand why we need to hurry here.
>
> > Currently any undecided PEP is stalled, and no one can pronounce on them.
>
> And maybe that's OK for a few months? I don't recall Guido ever
> accepting PEPs promptly. :)  Setting strict deadlines really seems
> like a last-resort option.
>
> > And we probably won't/can't promote any new core devs until we have new
> governance.
>
> IIRC we always promoted core devs by popular vote, so I don't think
> this would be a problem.  Do we have any candidates that are currently
> waiting for us deciding on a governance model?
>
> 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/

Re: [python-committers] Reminder of BDFL succession timeline + CFP

[Yury Selivanov]

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:44 PM Mariatta Wijaya
 wrote:
>
>
> Thank you for the responses and concerns.
>
> I do want to keep this discussion open and ongoing, and I still think that we 
> do need a set deadline on things.

I talked to a few core developers recently (at EuroPython and over
messengers) and I had an impression that some of them don't like an
idea of making a decision faster than everybody has a chance to say
their word.  Some of them are shy to publicly object to having strict
deadlines, some probably haven't yet seen this thread, some don't have
time to engage right now. You also see a few -1s in this very thread.
All in all, I really don't understand why we need to hurry here.

> Currently any undecided PEP is stalled, and no one can pronounce on them.

And maybe that's OK for a few months? I don't recall Guido ever
accepting PEPs promptly. :)  Setting strict deadlines really seems
like a last-resort option.

> And we probably won't/can't promote any new core devs until we have new 
> governance.

IIRC we always promoted core devs by popular vote, so I don't think
this would be a problem.  Do we have any candidates that are currently
waiting for us deciding on a governance model?

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/

Re: [python-committers] Reminder of BDFL succession timeline + CFP

[Mariatta Wijaya]

Thank you for the responses and concerns.

I do want to keep this discussion open and ongoing, and I still think that
we do need a set deadline on things.
Currently any undecided PEP is stalled, and no one can pronounce on them.
And we probably won't/can't promote any new core devs until we have new
governance.
Someone brought up the idea where core devs would be able to decide/vote on
PEPs and that would affect how we promote core devs.

I hope that having these dates will encourage all of us to prioritize this
issue and coming up with a solution.
If the deadline of January 1st is too short, please propose alternate
dates, but it should not be "whenever".

We may very well end up not having any kind of governance body
> initially and use a simple democratic voting scheme for any
> issues which may arise.


I see this as one proposal of a governance body, and it's acceptable if you
want to propose that we go this route for X years and re-evaluate it again.

It should be ok for us to choose one governance model this time, but decide
on something else next.


Mariatta
___
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/

Re: [python-committers] Reminder of BDFL succession timeline + CFP

[Yury Selivanov]

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 5:26 PM Nathaniel Smith  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/

[python-committers] View logs on VSTS?

[Antoine Pitrou]

Hello,

I may be missing something, but I fail to view the "tests" log in this
failed CI build:
https://python.visualstudio.com/cpython/_build/results?buildId=20701=logs

Regards

Antoine.
___
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/

Re: [python-committers] List of all core developers

[Eric Snow]

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 3:44 PM M.-A. Lemburg  wrote:
> On 01.08.2018 23:28, Mariatta Wijaya wrote:
> > See also an open issue to revamp the Developer log:
> > https://github.com/python/devguide/issues/390
> >
> > Someone has also said that they're working on tracking down the dormant
> > core devs, but now I can't find that email.
>
> I think the log is fine at it is, since it serves a different
> purpose.
>
> The list should be in addition to the log, not replacing it.
>
> Resources we already have:
>
> * https://devguide.python.org/developers/
> *
> https://bugs.python.org/user?%40action=search=1&%40pagesize=300&%40sort=username
> * python-committers Subscribers List (but this is currently only
>   for list admins to see - perhaps we could make that available
>   to list members ?!)
> * https://hg.python.org/committers.txt
> * for the early days:
>
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/python/cpython/e42b705188271da108de42b55d9344642170aa2b/Misc/HISTORY
>   in combination with
>
> https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/e42b705188271da108de42b55d9344642170aa2b/Misc/ACKS
>   (in those times, there was no direct access to the repo
>   and all patches had to go through the team around Guido)

There's also:

* the members of the github team
* folks marked as committers as BPO

I don't recall if these are exposed via public lists though.

-eric

> I think it would also be a good idea to include core developers
> of other Python implementations in such a document, in
> separate sections, e.g. for Jython, IronPython, PyPy,
> Stackless, etc.
___
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/

Re: [python-committers] List of all core developers

[M.-A. Lemburg]

On 01.08.2018 23:28, Mariatta Wijaya wrote:
> See also an open issue to revamp the Developer log:
> https://github.com/python/devguide/issues/390
> 
> Someone has also said that they're working on tracking down the dormant
> core devs, but now I can't find that email.

I think the log is fine at it is, since it serves a different
purpose.

The list should be in addition to the log, not replacing it.

Resources we already have:

* https://devguide.python.org/developers/
*
https://bugs.python.org/user?%40action=search=1&%40pagesize=300&%40sort=username
* python-committers Subscribers List (but this is currently only
  for list admins to see - perhaps we could make that available
  to list members ?!)
* https://hg.python.org/committers.txt
* for the early days:

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/python/cpython/e42b705188271da108de42b55d9344642170aa2b/Misc/HISTORY
  in combination with

https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/e42b705188271da108de42b55d9344642170aa2b/Misc/ACKS
  (in those times, there was no direct access to the repo
  and all patches had to go through the team around Guido)

I think it would also be a good idea to include core developers
of other Python implementations in such a document, in
separate sections, e.g. for Jython, IronPython, PyPy,
Stackless, etc.


> Mariatta
> 
> 
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 2:15 PM M.-A. Lemburg  wrote:
> 
>> It's become fairly obvious that we are missing a list of core
>> developers on some site. One we can use as reference and one
>> which core devs can also show to other to prove they are
>> core developers.
>>
>> I guess the natural place for such a list is the dev guide,
>> but we could also use a page on www.python.org, if that's easier
>> to maintain.
>>
>> Regarding format, I'd suggest to use the same as PSF Fellows
>> list:
>>
>> https://www.python.org/psf/members/#fellows
>>
>> Thoughts ?
>>
>> Note: Asking for this now is not completely unintentional.
>> The EuroPython Society has something to announce which will
>> require such a list.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> Marc-Andre Lemburg
>> eGenix.com
>>
>> Professional Python Services directly from the Experts (#1, Aug 01 2018)
> 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/
>>
> 

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com

Professional Python Services directly from the Experts (#1, Aug 01 2018)
>>> 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/

Re: [python-committers] List of all core developers

[Antoine Pitrou]

Le 01/08/2018 à 23:31, Jack Diederich a écrit :
> https://hg.python.org/committers.txt

Probably outdated, for example Pablo Salingo Salgado doesn't seem there.

Regards

Antoine.

> 
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 5:28 PM, Mariatta Wijaya
> mailto:mariatta.wij...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> See also an open issue to revamp the Developer log:
> https://github.com/python/devguide/issues/390
> 
> 
> Someone has also said that they're working on tracking down the
> dormant core devs, but now I can't find that email.
> 
> Mariatta
> 
> 
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 2:15 PM M.-A. Lemburg  > wrote:
> 
> It's become fairly obvious that we are missing a list of core
> developers on some site. One we can use as reference and one
> which core devs can also show to other to prove they are
> core developers.
> 
> I guess the natural place for such a list is the dev guide,
> but we could also use a page on www.python.org
> , if that's easier
> to maintain.
> 
> Regarding format, I'd suggest to use the same as PSF Fellows
> list:
> 
> https://www.python.org/psf/members/#fellows
> 
> 
> Thoughts ?
> 
> Note: Asking for this now is not completely unintentional.
> The EuroPython Society has something to announce which will
> require such a list.
> 
> Thanks,
> -- 
> Marc-Andre Lemburg
> eGenix.com
> 
> Professional Python Services directly from the Experts (#1, Aug
> 01 2018)
> >>> 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/
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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/
> 
___
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/

Re: [python-committers] List of all core developers

[Jack Diederich]

https://hg.python.org/committers.txt

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 5:28 PM, Mariatta Wijaya 
wrote:

> See also an open issue to revamp the Developer log:
> https://github.com/python/devguide/issues/390
>
> Someone has also said that they're working on tracking down the dormant
> core devs, but now I can't find that email.
>
> Mariatta
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 2:15 PM M.-A. Lemburg  wrote:
>
>> It's become fairly obvious that we are missing a list of core
>> developers on some site. One we can use as reference and one
>> which core devs can also show to other to prove they are
>> core developers.
>>
>> I guess the natural place for such a list is the dev guide,
>> but we could also use a page on www.python.org, if that's easier
>> to maintain.
>>
>> Regarding format, I'd suggest to use the same as PSF Fellows
>> list:
>>
>> https://www.python.org/psf/members/#fellows
>>
>> Thoughts ?
>>
>> Note: Asking for this now is not completely unintentional.
>> The EuroPython Society has something to announce which will
>> require such a list.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> Marc-Andre Lemburg
>> eGenix.com
>>
>> Professional Python Services directly from the Experts (#1, Aug 01 2018)
>> >>> 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/
>>
>
> ___
> 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/
>
>
___
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/

Re: [python-committers] List of all core developers

[Mariatta Wijaya]

See also an open issue to revamp the Developer log:
https://github.com/python/devguide/issues/390

Someone has also said that they're working on tracking down the dormant
core devs, but now I can't find that email.

Mariatta


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 2:15 PM M.-A. Lemburg  wrote:

> It's become fairly obvious that we are missing a list of core
> developers on some site. One we can use as reference and one
> which core devs can also show to other to prove they are
> core developers.
>
> I guess the natural place for such a list is the dev guide,
> but we could also use a page on www.python.org, if that's easier
> to maintain.
>
> Regarding format, I'd suggest to use the same as PSF Fellows
> list:
>
> https://www.python.org/psf/members/#fellows
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Note: Asking for this now is not completely unintentional.
> The EuroPython Society has something to announce which will
> require such a list.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Marc-Andre Lemburg
> eGenix.com
>
> Professional Python Services directly from the Experts (#1, Aug 01 2018)
> >>> 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/
>
___
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/

Re: [python-committers] Reminder of BDFL succession timeline + CFP

[Antoine Pitrou]

I think Nathaniel and Marc-André are speaking wisely here.
Sorry, I've not much to add ;-)

Regards

Antoine.


Le 01/08/2018 à 23:22, Nathaniel Smith a écrit :
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Mariatta Wijaya
>  wrote:
>> Since this is like a CFP I figured we should clarify what's expected the
>> proposal, and I also wanted to be more detailed in the timeline.
>>
>> Oct 1 00:00:00 UTC: Deadline of coming up with proposals of governance
>> model.
>>
>> To be included in the proposal:
>> - explanation and reasoning of the governance model
>> - expected roles and responsibilities
>> - candidate for the role need not be included at this time, since we're only
>> choosing the governance model. Depending on the governance model chosen, we
>> might have different people to be nominated. There will be a separate
>> process for nominating the candidate.
>> - the term of governance: is it for life? 5 years? 10 years?
>>
>> Who can submit the proposal?
>> Python core developers. Individual core devs can submit a proposal, or
>> co-author the proposal with another core dev.
>>
>> How to submit the proposal?
>> Proposal should be in a form of a PEP, and merged into peps repo before Oct
>> 1 00:00:00 UTC. Proposals not merged after Oct 1 00:00:00 UTC will not be
>> considered.
>>
>> Oct 1 - Nov 15: Review period.
>> All core developers will review the PEPs, and ask any questions to the PEP
>> author. This timeline allows for enough time for all core devs to carefully
>> review each PEPs, and for authors to respond.
>>
>> There will be two parts of this:
>>
>> Review phase 1: Oct 1- Nov 1: Allow changes and tweaks to the proposed PEPs.
>> I figured people will have questions and will need to clarify the PEPs
>> during this period. But if we want the PEP to be final by Oct 1, that's fine
>> by me. maybe allow typo fixes still.
>>
>> Review phase 2: Nov 1 00:00:00 UTC: No more changes to the above PEPs.
>> No more tweaks to these PEPs. PRs to these PEPs should be rejected.
>> This is the final chance to carefully review all governance PEPs, and
>> formulate your decisions.
> 
> I'm worried that this whole plan is a bad idea.
> 
> This kind of process with deadlines, proposals, votes, etc., is an
> excellent way to take legitimacy and make it visible. That's a
> valuable thing, and addresses an important problem. But it's not the
> problem I'm most worried about here.
> 
> As engineers, we know that every design has trade-offs, and that goes
> for governance as well. Having a universally acclaimed BDFL like Guido
> has many tremendous advantages. But it also has one tremendous
> disadvantage: because we always knew Guido would make the final
> decision, and that we could always appeal to him when things didn't go
> the way we like, python-dev has never had to learn to work out
> disagreements and get along.
> 
> 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.
> 
> -n
> 
___
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/

Re: [python-committers] Reminder of BDFL succession timeline + CFP

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Mariatta Wijaya
 wrote:
> Since this is like a CFP I figured we should clarify what's expected the
> proposal, and I also wanted to be more detailed in the timeline.
>
> Oct 1 00:00:00 UTC: Deadline of coming up with proposals of governance
> model.
>
> To be included in the proposal:
> - explanation and reasoning of the governance model
> - expected roles and responsibilities
> - candidate for the role need not be included at this time, since we're only
> choosing the governance model. Depending on the governance model chosen, we
> might have different people to be nominated. There will be a separate
> process for nominating the candidate.
> - the term of governance: is it for life? 5 years? 10 years?
>
> Who can submit the proposal?
> Python core developers. Individual core devs can submit a proposal, or
> co-author the proposal with another core dev.
>
> How to submit the proposal?
> Proposal should be in a form of a PEP, and merged into peps repo before Oct
> 1 00:00:00 UTC. Proposals not merged after Oct 1 00:00:00 UTC will not be
> considered.
>
> Oct 1 - Nov 15: Review period.
> All core developers will review the PEPs, and ask any questions to the PEP
> author. This timeline allows for enough time for all core devs to carefully
> review each PEPs, and for authors to respond.
>
> There will be two parts of this:
>
> Review phase 1: Oct 1- Nov 1: Allow changes and tweaks to the proposed PEPs.
> I figured people will have questions and will need to clarify the PEPs
> during this period. But if we want the PEP to be final by Oct 1, that's fine
> by me. maybe allow typo fixes still.
>
> Review phase 2: Nov 1 00:00:00 UTC: No more changes to the above PEPs.
> No more tweaks to these PEPs. PRs to these PEPs should be rejected.
> This is the final chance to carefully review all governance PEPs, and
> formulate your decisions.

I'm worried that this whole plan is a bad idea.

This kind of process with deadlines, proposals, votes, etc., is an
excellent way to take legitimacy and make it visible. That's a
valuable thing, and addresses an important problem. But it's not the
problem I'm most worried about here.

As engineers, we know that every design has trade-offs, and that goes
for governance as well. Having a universally acclaimed BDFL like Guido
has many tremendous advantages. But it also has one tremendous
disadvantage: because we always knew Guido would make the final
decision, and that we could always appeal to him when things didn't go
the way we like, python-dev has never had to learn to work out
disagreements and get along.

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.

-n

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
___
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/

[python-committers] List of all core developers

[M.-A. Lemburg]

It's become fairly obvious that we are missing a list of core
developers on some site. One we can use as reference and one
which core devs can also show to other to prove they are
core developers.

I guess the natural place for such a list is the dev guide,
but we could also use a page on www.python.org, if that's easier
to maintain.

Regarding format, I'd suggest to use the same as PSF Fellows
list:

https://www.python.org/psf/members/#fellows

Thoughts ?

Note: Asking for this now is not completely unintentional.
The EuroPython Society has something to announce which will
require such a list.

Thanks,
-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com

Professional Python Services directly from the Experts (#1, Aug 01 2018)
>>> 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/

Re: [python-committers] Reminder of BDFL succession timeline + CFP

[M.-A. Lemburg]

Thanks for your action plan, Mariatta, but I'm -1 on having
strict timelines for these processes.

We need to gradually approach a new model as we've done in the
past decades and not push for any possibly borked model right from
the start. The processes for this need to stay flexible, easy
to adapt and include the possibility for failure.

There is no rush for any such model. There is no need to select
anyone for life or longer periods: e.g. we may want to change the
whole model after 2 years - what are we then going to do with
those persons ?

We may very well end up not having any kind of governance body
initially and use a simple democratic voting scheme for any
issues which may arise.


FWIW, I don't see anyone in the core development team with the
necessary language design skills, vision or intuition to provide
an overarching scheme for the future of Python and I don't expect
that we'll find such people any time soon.

What we do have is a good number of smart people with expert
domain knowledge. We should build on those for the time being
until we have grown a vision for the future to provide more
direction.

So let's ponder some more about ideas we could use to
get there and perhaps watch some Monty Python movies for
inspiration ;-)


Cheers,
-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg


On 01.08.2018 21:41, Mariatta Wijaya wrote:
> Since this is like a CFP I figured we should clarify what's expected the
> proposal, and I also wanted to be more detailed in the timeline.
> 
> *Oct 1 00:00:00 UTC:* Deadline of coming up with proposals of governance
> model.
> 
> To be included in the proposal:
> - explanation and reasoning of the governance model
> - expected roles and responsibilities
> - candidate for the role need not be included at this time, since we're
> only choosing the governance model. Depending on the governance model
> chosen, we might have different people to be nominated. There will be a
> separate process for nominating the candidate.
> - the term of governance: is it for life? 5 years? 10 years?
> 
> Who can submit the proposal?
> Python core developers. Individual core devs can submit a proposal, or
> co-author the proposal with another core dev.
> 
> How to submit the proposal?
> Proposal should be in a form of a PEP, and merged into peps repo before Oct
> 1 00:00:00 UTC. Proposals not merged after Oct 1 00:00:00 UTC will not be
> considered.
> 
> *Oct 1 - Nov 15: Review period.*
> All core developers will review the PEPs, and ask any questions to the PEP
> author. This timeline allows for enough time for all core devs to carefully
> review each PEPs, and for authors to respond.
> 
> There will be two parts of this:
> 
> *Review phase 1: Oct 1- Nov 1:* Allow changes and tweaks to the proposed
> PEPs.
> I figured people will have questions and will need to clarify the PEPs
> during this period. But if we want the PEP to be final by Oct 1, that's
> fine by me. maybe allow typo fixes still.
> 
> *Review phase 2: Nov 1 00:00:00 UTC*: No more changes to the above PEPs.
> No more tweaks to these PEPs. PRs to these PEPs should be rejected.
> This is the final chance to carefully review all governance PEPs, and
> formulate your decisions.
> 
> *Nov 15 00:00:00 UTC: Voting for new governance model starts, and will go
> for 2 weeks*
> Send reminders for folks to vote.
> 
> Who can vote:
> Only core developers can vote.
> 
> *Vote will be anonymous.*
> *We will use the system used to elect PSF board members.*
> 
> 
> *Dec 1 00:00:00 UTC: Voting ended*.
> The most voted proposal will be accepted.
> Depending on the chosen governance model, we'll begin nominating candidates
> to fill the role(s).
> 
> *Dec 10 00:00:00 UTC Deadline for nominating candidates to fill the role*
> Maybe just one PEP to list all the nominations, instead of separate PEPs of
> each candidates.
> 
> Who can nominate: Python core developers
> Who can be nominated: Python core developers
> 
> *Dec 15 00:00:00 UTC Voting for new successor starts*
> (Depends on the governance model chosen on Dec 1)
> 
> *Who can vote:*
> *Only core developers can vote.*
> 
> *Vote will be anonymous.*
> *We will use the system used to elect PSF board members.*
> 
> *Jan 1 00:00:00 UTC Voting for new successor ends.* Most voted candidate(s)
> is chosen.
> 
> The PSF's Code of Conduct applies to all interactions with core devs
> regarding this process, including interactions in any mailing lists, zulip,
> IRC, twitter, GitHub, backchannels.
> 
> Questions
> 1. For the purpose of eligibility (for voting or writing the PEP), who are
> considered as "core developers"? Anyone in python-committers? Anyone on
> Python Core GitHub team? Anyone with commit bit? What about core developers
> of alternate implementation (PyPy, IronPython, etc)
> 
> 2. Are people ok UTC timezone?
> 
> 3. Should this be a PEP?
> 
> Mariatta
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers@python.org
> 

Re: [python-committers] Reminder of BDFL succession timeline + CFP

[Mariatta Wijaya]

Thanks! AoE timezone works for me.
In that case, let's use AoE instead of UTC.

Mariatta


On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 1:36 PM Thomas Wouters  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:42 PM Mariatta Wijaya 
> wrote:
>
>> 2. Are people ok UTC timezone?
>>
>
> FYI, for the PSF elections and similar deadlines, we use the AoE timezone:
> https://www.timeanddate.com/time/zones/aoe -- it makes it harder for
> people to miss the deadline for timezone reasons.
>
> --
> Thomas Wouters 
>
> Hi! I'm an email virus! Think twice before sending your email to help me
> spread!
>
___
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/

Re: [python-committers] Reminder of BDFL succession timeline + CFP

[Thomas Wouters]

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:42 PM Mariatta Wijaya 
wrote:

> 2. Are people ok UTC timezone?
>

FYI, for the PSF elections and similar deadlines, we use the AoE timezone:
https://www.timeanddate.com/time/zones/aoe -- it makes it harder for people
to miss the deadline for timezone reasons.

-- 
Thomas Wouters 

Hi! I'm an email virus! Think twice before sending your email to help me
spread!
___
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/

[python-committers] Reminder of BDFL succession timeline + CFP

[Mariatta Wijaya]

Since this is like a CFP I figured we should clarify what's expected the
proposal, and I also wanted to be more detailed in the timeline.

*Oct 1 00:00:00 UTC:* Deadline of coming up with proposals of governance
model.

To be included in the proposal:
- explanation and reasoning of the governance model
- expected roles and responsibilities
- candidate for the role need not be included at this time, since we're
only choosing the governance model. Depending on the governance model
chosen, we might have different people to be nominated. There will be a
separate process for nominating the candidate.
- the term of governance: is it for life? 5 years? 10 years?

Who can submit the proposal?
Python core developers. Individual core devs can submit a proposal, or
co-author the proposal with another core dev.

How to submit the proposal?
Proposal should be in a form of a PEP, and merged into peps repo before Oct
1 00:00:00 UTC. Proposals not merged after Oct 1 00:00:00 UTC will not be
considered.

*Oct 1 - Nov 15: Review period.*
All core developers will review the PEPs, and ask any questions to the PEP
author. This timeline allows for enough time for all core devs to carefully
review each PEPs, and for authors to respond.

There will be two parts of this:

*Review phase 1: Oct 1- Nov 1:* Allow changes and tweaks to the proposed
PEPs.
I figured people will have questions and will need to clarify the PEPs
during this period. But if we want the PEP to be final by Oct 1, that's
fine by me. maybe allow typo fixes still.

*Review phase 2: Nov 1 00:00:00 UTC*: No more changes to the above PEPs.
No more tweaks to these PEPs. PRs to these PEPs should be rejected.
This is the final chance to carefully review all governance PEPs, and
formulate your decisions.

*Nov 15 00:00:00 UTC: Voting for new governance model starts, and will go
for 2 weeks*
Send reminders for folks to vote.

Who can vote:
Only core developers can vote.

*Vote will be anonymous.*
*We will use the system used to elect PSF board members.*


*Dec 1 00:00:00 UTC: Voting ended*.
The most voted proposal will be accepted.
Depending on the chosen governance model, we'll begin nominating candidates
to fill the role(s).

*Dec 10 00:00:00 UTC Deadline for nominating candidates to fill the role*
Maybe just one PEP to list all the nominations, instead of separate PEPs of
each candidates.

Who can nominate: Python core developers
Who can be nominated: Python core developers

*Dec 15 00:00:00 UTC Voting for new successor starts*
(Depends on the governance model chosen on Dec 1)

*Who can vote:*
*Only core developers can vote.*

*Vote will be anonymous.*
*We will use the system used to elect PSF board members.*

*Jan 1 00:00:00 UTC Voting for new successor ends.* Most voted candidate(s)
is chosen.

The PSF's Code of Conduct applies to all interactions with core devs
regarding this process, including interactions in any mailing lists, zulip,
IRC, twitter, GitHub, backchannels.

Questions
1. For the purpose of eligibility (for voting or writing the PEP), who are
considered as "core developers"? Anyone in python-committers? Anyone on
Python Core GitHub team? Anyone with commit bit? What about core developers
of alternate implementation (PyPy, IronPython, etc)

2. Are people ok UTC timezone?

3. Should this be a PEP?

Mariatta
___
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/