On 7 February 2016 at 20:23, Maciej Szulik <solt...@gmail.com> wrote: > Talking from the position of owning a similar bot in OpenShift, I quite > certain that it's really hard to have common base. Since these bots > address specific project and there are not two exactly the same projects > with exactly the same workflow. I think what Nick meant to show is, > what we should target, more or less at least.
It was a combination of a suggestion and a question. The suggestion was "Rust's automation UX seems nice, I think it would be desirable to target similar capabilities for CPython", the question was "Would it be feasible to collaborate on actual automation development?". It sounds like the pragmatic answer to the latter is "No, the additional coordination overhead isn't worth the potential pay-off", and I think that's fine - our respective communities can still learn from each other when it comes to our definitions of "What does 'good' look like?" in workflow design. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ core-workflow mailing list core-workflow@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/core-workflow This list is governed by the PSF Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct
