In my opinion, it may be too soon to make an evaluation of DEP. Most importantly, it has to be put in context to what happened/is happening: - there was a security release - there was a fix to the security release - there is a version of Django to be released with *considerable* new features, that naturally have release blockers to be fixed.
I believe this waiting time has nothing to do with being a DEP, a PEP, or a simple feature request; it is just that DEP was formally announced before the start of the new cycle - 1.8 - to be used on it, and the current priority is to close the current cycle, which is demanding a considerable commitment, specially from the core devs, as some already expressed here. It may be worth performing an evaluation of the DEP procedure; however, my suggestion is to postpone it to after the release of 1.8, since at that time we have a full release cycle where DEP was used and tested. In my opinion, this will allow a more pragmatic evaluation that matches more closely the expectations and ideas behind the DEP. Regards, Jorge On Friday, May 9, 2014 6:46:51 PM UTC+2, Trey Hunner wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 04/29/2014 08:58 PM, Michael Manfre wrote: > > From DEP 001: > > > > "Once you've written a DEP and submitted the pull request, post a > > message about it to the django-developers mailing list. At that point, > > Django developers will make sure it's technically feasible, not spam, > > etc., assign it a DEP number and commit it to the repository as > > "Active." This doesn't mean the feature will be implemented; it merely > > means the proposal is officially a DEP." > > > > There are two DEP pull requests that seem to have sat for two weeks > > waiting to be merged in as "Active" with numbers assigned. They are both > > clearly not spam and are technically feasible. I'm curious why they have > > not been moved along in the process. > > I'm not convinced that the open pull requests are a problem. I don't > see any comments on any of the pull requests stating that a DEP seems > ready to be merged. > > Maybe the problem here is an unclear/absent process for merging? I > would think merging should purposely be delayed because once the DEP is > merged it is no longer active unless a new pull request is made to > modify it. > > The current process assigns a number only after the pull request has > been merged. I'm not sure those two steps should be related. > Assignment of a DEP number could happen *before* the pull request is > merged. > > How does the PEP process handle this? Are threads ever declared "done" > and if so is that finalization separate from the assignment of a PEP > number? > > - -- > Trey Hunner > http://treyhunner.com > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1 > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTbQZ7AAoJEOpnfp/NreonXkwH/jRsO7gcc6HX5b1kdZmGpoOO > 92sX9gtjYiX8NwkEwjQaTAOGGCLhxZXnvwN1IMdjMR4ogE7rs9vg0Uc4hML0UYYL > 1zijA8sxJF4ZeuIgAk/hFIRfOHVfAkJUaSdkAtVijH3VPX8wvd/NqAr5zlGn/e9b > 0DsvA5OczZea6VvqllZfqQVJ6KJA7lfDWjf6PRKGnWl+Daxi9ygkhUV7E0pyt/qZ > wqV6jSBqvNkoT/QPdpXnXvKd8ZkG8KtOw+VYuJJb3cf2guUXdwy9tHX6Lmlm2IMR > AhCnRHJPAqqVRDhswocFJCJ1tIUjObnb2rVsxgwh11PrcNhLz7z/MS7rN3M+lcQ= > =TmrW > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/ed51f725-6d43-4da5-96e7-7e90721694e0%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
