Agree with Yuri. We have not big amount of non-committer contributions into
asyncio, and every non-trivial change requires very careful review.
On Thu, Apr 26, 2018, 17:32 Yury Selivanov wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 10:12 AM Victor Stinner
> wrote:
> [..]
> > I identified 3 obvious subteams
On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 at 07:41 Victor Stinner wrote:
> Ok, maybe asyncio is not a good candidate to experiment. I know that
> asyncio internals are complex, and asynchronous programming is hard.
>
> Sure, the risk of regression in the Documentation is lower :-) But it
> doesn't mean that we should
Ok, maybe asyncio is not a good candidate to experiment. I know that
asyncio internals are complex, and asynchronous programming is hard.
Sure, the risk of regression in the Documentation is lower :-) But it
doesn't mean that we should accept any change in the doc. I already
saw people proposing t
On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 10:12 AM Victor Stinner wrote:
[..]
> I identified 3 obvious subteams:
> * Documentation
> * IDLE
> * asyncio
Sorry, asyncio isn't an obvious choice for me. There are not so many
low-hanging fruits left in asyncio except improvements to its
documentation. I'm a firm -1 to
Hi,
While thinking about how to get more contributors onboard, I
identified that one bottleneck is building trust. Currently, a vote to
promote a contributor as a core dev requires the approval of almost
all active core developers, and this list is quite large (50 people?
more?). It takes a lot of
