[Python-Dev] Re: [python-committers] Resignation from Stefan Krah

[Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev]

I don't see the point of requiring to "write an apology", especially *before a 12-month ban*. If they understand that their behavior is 
wrong, there's no need for a ban, at least not such a long one; if they don't, they clearly aren't going to write it, at least not now (they 
might later, after a few weeks or months, having cooled down and thought it over). So all it would achieve is public shaming AFAICS. Same 
issue with the threat of "zero tolerance policy" -- it's completely unnecessary and only serves to humiliate and alienate the recipient.


Cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Purpose_and_goals, specifically: "blocks should not be punitive, blocks should 
be preventative".


(Btw thanks for publishing the letter. This is done very rarely so issues like 
this most often go unnoticed.)

On 09.10.2020 2:07, Thomas Wouters wrote:


Stefan did indeed receive, and was notified of, a 1-year ban from core development. This action was based on advice from the Conduct WG 
and our own deliberations. We wanted to have a discussion with him before we made this public. The SC sent him an email with details 
(quoted below), three weeks ago, CC'ing the Conduct WG. We had a brief back-and-forth last week. Unfortunately (and without telling us), 
Stefan apparently declined to address the matter in the way we asked.


For the record, the Steering Council followed the PEP 13 procedure for ejecting a core developer 
(https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0013/#ejecting-core-team-members) and voted unanimously to eject Stefan, as we told Stefan we would 
do if he chose not to address the concerns we outlined below.


Our original message to Stefan:
"""
Dear Stefan,

The Python Steering Council and the PSF Conduct Working Group have received reports of your ongoing behavior in the Python core developer 
community. The Steering Council agrees with the Conduct Working Group’s findings that this behavior is unacceptable. While we appreciate 
your valuable technical contributions to CPython, that does not exempt you from the expected standards of behavior and the Code of Conduct.


Specifically, your behavior has displayed:

* Disrespectful, hostile, and unwelcoming communication in tone and content
* Harassment by needlessly adding people to issues
* A disregard of the directions and authority of the release manager

Some examples of the problematic behavior include:

* https://bugs.python.org/issue36839#msg344544
* https://bugs.python.org/issue40874#msg372616
* https://bugs.python.org/issue40874#msg372917
* https://bugs.python.org/issue40874#msg372922
* https://bugs.python.org/issue39542#msg372983

We are also aware that this is not new behavior. We know the PSF Conduct WG warned you on April 23, 2020 about your previous violations of 
the Code of Conduct.


As such, we are taking the action of suspending your participation in Python's development for 12 months starting today. You will lose 
access to:


* Python-committers
* Python-dev
* Python-ideas
* Core-mentorship
* bugs.python.org 
* discuss.python.org 
* The Python organization on GitHub

Along with the 12-month suspension, you will need to meet additional conditions 
in good faith:

* Please acknowledge that you have read and understand the Code of Conduct and 
promise to abide by it going forward
* You write an apology to your fellow core developers for your actions which we 
will publish on your behalf when announcing your suspension
* Acknowledge that future reinstatement will include a zero-tolerance conduct 
policy in regards to your future behavior

We offer you 14 days from today to meet these conditions and submit them to the 
Steering Council via email.

If you choose not to satisfy these conditions, the 12-month suspension will become a permanent ejection from the Python core developer 
community as per the procedures outlined in PEP 13.  You are then free to go through the Python core developer election process also as 
outlined in PEP 13, however the Steering Council will not consider approving any positive outcome of that vote until the 12-month 
suspension has elapsed.


- The Python Steering Council
"""

On behalf of the Steering Council,
Thomas.

On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 11:48 PM Antoine Pitrou mailto:anto...@python.org>> wrote:


Hello,

Apparently, Stefan Krah (core developer and author of the C _decimal
module) was silently banned or moderated from posting to python.org 

mailing-lists.  He asked me to forward the following message:



==
Hello,

Today I have left the Python organization.  It wasn't an easy decision,
after all there are so many amazing people here.

My vision of how development should be handled differs from many people
who are currently active.  Other projects are more aligned with my
preferences, so I prefer to focus

[Python-Dev] Re: [python-committers] Resignation from Stefan Krah

[Thomas Wouters]

Stefan did indeed receive, and was notified of, a 1-year ban from core
development. This action was based on advice from the Conduct WG and our
own deliberations. We wanted to have a discussion with him before we made
this public. The SC sent him an email with details (quoted below), three
weeks ago, CC'ing the Conduct WG. We had a brief back-and-forth last week.
Unfortunately (and without telling us), Stefan apparently declined to
address the matter in the way we asked.

For the record, the Steering Council followed the PEP 13 procedure for
ejecting a core developer (
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0013/#ejecting-core-team-members) and
voted unanimously to eject Stefan, as we told Stefan we would do if he
chose not to address the concerns we outlined below.

Our original message to Stefan:
"""
Dear Stefan,

The Python Steering Council and the PSF Conduct Working Group have received
reports of your ongoing behavior in the Python core developer community.
The Steering Council agrees with the Conduct Working Group’s findings that
this behavior is unacceptable. While we appreciate your valuable technical
contributions to CPython, that does not exempt you from the expected
standards of behavior and the Code of Conduct.

Specifically, your behavior has displayed:

* Disrespectful, hostile, and unwelcoming communication in tone and content
* Harassment by needlessly adding people to issues
* A disregard of the directions and authority of the release manager

Some examples of the problematic behavior include:

* https://bugs.python.org/issue36839#msg344544
* https://bugs.python.org/issue40874#msg372616
* https://bugs.python.org/issue40874#msg372917
* https://bugs.python.org/issue40874#msg372922
* https://bugs.python.org/issue39542#msg372983

We are also aware that this is not new behavior. We know the PSF Conduct WG
warned you on April 23, 2020 about your previous violations of the Code of
Conduct.

As such, we are taking the action of suspending your participation in
Python's development for 12 months starting today. You will lose access to:

* Python-committers
* Python-dev
* Python-ideas
* Core-mentorship
* bugs.python.org
* discuss.python.org
* The Python organization on GitHub

Along with the 12-month suspension, you will need to meet additional
conditions in good faith:

* Please acknowledge that you have read and understand the Code of Conduct
and promise to abide by it going forward
* You write an apology to your fellow core developers for your actions
which we will publish on your behalf when announcing your suspension
* Acknowledge that future reinstatement will include a zero-tolerance
conduct policy in regards to your future behavior

We offer you 14 days from today to meet these conditions and submit them to
the Steering Council via email.

If you choose not to satisfy these conditions, the 12-month suspension will
become a permanent ejection from the Python core developer community as per
the procedures outlined in PEP 13.  You are then free to go through the
Python core developer election process also as outlined in PEP 13, however
the Steering Council will not consider approving any positive outcome of
that vote until the 12-month suspension has elapsed.

- The Python Steering Council
"""

On behalf of the Steering Council,
Thomas.

On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 11:48 PM Antoine Pitrou  wrote:

>
> Hello,
>
> Apparently, Stefan Krah (core developer and author of the C _decimal
> module) was silently banned or moderated from posting to python.org
> mailing-lists.  He asked me to forward the following message:
>
>
>
> ==
> Hello,
>
> Today I have left the Python organization.  It wasn't an easy decision,
> after all there are so many amazing people here.
>
> My vision of how development should be handled differs from many people
> who are currently active.  Other projects are more aligned with my
> preferences, so I prefer to focus my energies elsewhere.
>
> Having a shared understanding of what constitutes politeness is
> important and eliminates all sources of friction that sometimes result
> in losing one's patience.
>
> All the best,
>
> Stefan Krah
>
> 
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Antoine.
> ___
> python-committers mailing list -- python-committ...@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-committ...@python.org/message/ZIAN7ERZNF4ZE2B2SLYNRPVNERNACG5A/
> Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>


-- 
Thomas Wouters 

Hi! I'm an email virus! Think twice before sending your email to help me
spread!
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscr

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 617 -- New PEG parser for CPython

[Pablo Galindo Salgado]

Our experience with automatic testing is that unfortunately is very
difficult to extract real problems with it. We tried some of the new
experimental source generators on top of hypothesis (
https://pypi.org/project/hypothesmith/) and sadly we could not catch many
important things that parsing existing source or tests did immediately.
This is because the grammar space is infinite and therefore exploring it
for parser failures without any constraint on what to explore or what's the
actual structure of the parser won't give you much. If you consider the
collection of programs that don't belong to the language, the cardinality
is even higher.

For example, we had a bug at some point that manifested only when an
f-sring had a specific number of nesting, although normal f-strings parsed
just fine. Catching this automatically without knowing what to look for is
very unlikely.

As one cannot prove that two parsers parse the same language or that two
grammars are equivalent (is equivalent to the halting problem), normally
this is solved with testing both parses with a corpus big enough of both
positive parses and negative ones. In order to improve our confidence with
the negative cases, we would need first a good enough corpus of cases to
test.

On Thu, 8 Oct 2020, 20:49 Daniel Moisset,  wrote:

> In this case, you can use the old parser as an oracle, at least for python
> 3.8 syntax. The new parser should produce a syntax error if and only if the
> old one does. And if it doesn't the AST should be the same I guess (I'm not
> sue if the AST structure changed)
>
> On Thu, 8 Oct 2020, 03:12 Terry Reedy,  wrote:
>
>> On 10/6/2020 2:02 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> > That's appreciated, but I think what's needed more is someone who
>> > actually wants to undertake this project. It's not just a matter of
>> > running a small script for hours -- someone will have to come up with a
>> > way to fuzz that is actually useful for this particular situation
>> > (inserting random characters in files isn't going to be very
>> effective).
>>
>> Changes should be by token or broader grammatical construct.  However,
>> the real difficulty in auto testing is the lack of a decision mechanism
>> for correct output (code object versus SyntaxError) other than the tests
>> being either designed or checked by parser experts.
>>
>> Classical fuzzing looks for some clearly wrong -- a crash -- rather than
>> an answer *or* an Exception.  So yes, random fuzzing that does not pass
>> known limits could be done to look for crashes.  But this is different
>> from raising SyntaxError to reject wrong programs.
>>
>> Consider unary prefix operators:
>>
>> *a is a SyntaxError, because the grammar circumscribes the use of '*' as
>> prefix.
>>
>> -'' is not, which might surprise some, but I presume the error not being
>> caught until runtime, as a TypeError, is correct for the grammar as
>> written.  Or did I just discover a parser bug?  Or a possible grammar
>> improvement?
>> (In other words, if I, even with my experience, tried grammar/parser
>> fuzzing, I might be as much a nuisance as a help.)
>>
>> It would not necessarily be a regression if the grammar and parser were
>> changed so that an obvious error like "- " were to be
>> caught as a SyntaxError.
>>
>>
>> > "(One area we have not explored extensively is rejection of all
>> > wrong programs.
>>
>> I consider false rejection to be a bigger sin than false acceptance.
>> Wrong programs, like "-''", are likely to fail at runtime anyway.  So
>> one could test acceptance of randomly generated correct but not
>> ridiculously big programs.  But I guess compiling the stdlib and other
>> packages already pretty well covered this.
>>
>> >  We have unit tests that check for a certain number
>> > of explicit rejections, but more work could be done, e.g. by using a
>> > fuzzer that inserts random subtle bugs into existing code. We're
>> > open to help in this area.)"
>> > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0617/#validation
>>
>>
>> --
>> Terry Jan Reedy
>> ___
>> Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
>> Message archived at
>> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/FNMPQUDPZTX7E4CAGDENNFU6AQJJMW34/
>> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>>
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/D33DNLDR4Y6HCGL7K3WRDORNMCLDJ6D5/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe 

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 617 -- New PEG parser for CPython

[Daniel Moisset]

In this case, you can use the old parser as an oracle, at least for python
3.8 syntax. The new parser should produce a syntax error if and only if the
old one does. And if it doesn't the AST should be the same I guess (I'm not
sue if the AST structure changed)

On Thu, 8 Oct 2020, 03:12 Terry Reedy,  wrote:

> On 10/6/2020 2:02 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > That's appreciated, but I think what's needed more is someone who
> > actually wants to undertake this project. It's not just a matter of
> > running a small script for hours -- someone will have to come up with a
> > way to fuzz that is actually useful for this particular situation
> > (inserting random characters in files isn't going to be very effective).
>
> Changes should be by token or broader grammatical construct.  However,
> the real difficulty in auto testing is the lack of a decision mechanism
> for correct output (code object versus SyntaxError) other than the tests
> being either designed or checked by parser experts.
>
> Classical fuzzing looks for some clearly wrong -- a crash -- rather than
> an answer *or* an Exception.  So yes, random fuzzing that does not pass
> known limits could be done to look for crashes.  But this is different
> from raising SyntaxError to reject wrong programs.
>
> Consider unary prefix operators:
>
> *a is a SyntaxError, because the grammar circumscribes the use of '*' as
> prefix.
>
> -'' is not, which might surprise some, but I presume the error not being
> caught until runtime, as a TypeError, is correct for the grammar as
> written.  Or did I just discover a parser bug?  Or a possible grammar
> improvement?
> (In other words, if I, even with my experience, tried grammar/parser
> fuzzing, I might be as much a nuisance as a help.)
>
> It would not necessarily be a regression if the grammar and parser were
> changed so that an obvious error like "- " were to be
> caught as a SyntaxError.
>
>
> > "(One area we have not explored extensively is rejection of all
> > wrong programs.
>
> I consider false rejection to be a bigger sin than false acceptance.
> Wrong programs, like "-''", are likely to fail at runtime anyway.  So
> one could test acceptance of randomly generated correct but not
> ridiculously big programs.  But I guess compiling the stdlib and other
> packages already pretty well covered this.
>
> >  We have unit tests that check for a certain number
> > of explicit rejections, but more work could be done, e.g. by using a
> > fuzzer that inserts random subtle bugs into existing code. We're
> > open to help in this area.)"
> > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0617/#validation
>
>
> --
> Terry Jan Reedy
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/FNMPQUDPZTX7E4CAGDENNFU6AQJJMW34/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/D33DNLDR4Y6HCGL7K3WRDORNMCLDJ6D5/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: [RELEASE] Python 3.9.0 is now available, and you can already test 3.10.0a1!

[Miro Hrončok]

On 08. 10. 20 12:22, Pablo Galindo Salgado wrote:

Hi Miro,

Thanks for your email. I will see if I can modify that file to include my key.


Awesome, thanks.


 > I see the text at
https://www.python.org/downloads/  about GPG 
has changed (since yesterday?) and

it no longer contains the link.

The text changes because I added my key bug I didn't delete any link IIRC. Do 
you know if the link to the file you mentioned used to be there?


Right, the change from yesterday is addition of your key, not removal of the 
link.

IIRC It used to be there, but if not, it must have been somewhere else, 
otherwise we would not have used it. I wonder where :/ searching...


Oh, it seems to be deprecated :(

https://github.com/python/pythondotorg/pull/1509

So maybe we indeed need to use your key directly after all.

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/O3VZ2IOPA2NFUUAYFUQLNFEU7YNTHEL7/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

[Python-Dev] Re: [RELEASE] Python 3.9.0 is now available, and you can already test 3.10.0a1!

[Miro Hrončok]

On 05. 10. 20 22:22, Łukasz Langa wrote:
In fact, our newest Release Manager, Pablo Galindo Salgado, prepared the first 
alpha release of what will become 3.10.0 a year from now. You can check it out here:


https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-3100a1/ 



Hello Pablo.

Could you please include your GPG key in 
https://www.python.org/static/files/pubkeys.txt ? I see the text at 
https://www.python.org/downloads/ about GPG has changed (since yesterday?) and 
it no longer contains the link.


In Fedora, we verify the tarball during build time (offline) so we include the 
keys in the source package. It was really convenient to be able to use that key 
file directly instead of using the key of a specific release manager for each 
release.


Thanks.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/ZWK6AR6ZCK7MSY3DGTMT6NHP4MTPK6GI/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/