Am 14.03.26 um 09:40 schrieb Danil Smirnov via Mailman-Developers:
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 6:18 PM Stephen J. Turnbull <[email protected]>
wrote:
khushal via Mailman-Developers writes:
> i'm thinking of a pub-sub layer inside MM3 core using a outbox +
> worker design,
My apologies, I should have removed that task. It was done last
summer, but the contributor changed career paths midsummer and hasn't
finished the integration.
I'm sorry, but what does this mean?
Does this mean that any Mailman task unfinished in previous seasons goes to
a GSoC graveyard where it sits forever, effectively blocking any other
effort in this direction?
It sounds awful.
I hope Mailman is a valuable product in its own right, not just a training
toy for GSoC students (I don't have anything against GSoC in general,
though). The most interesting ideas collected for GSoC should be
implemented, not left buried in the GSoC archives.
We already had this talk before:
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/thread/5TIVEEXB4W6JXXII2JD7QUVQCNVDVRFW/
and we still don't have the "List Configuration Tool" available after 3
years, so I suppose I have the right to raise this issue...
Are you sponsoring the completion of what the student project has left
behind half-done? The projects have cost (effort) with design
reviews, advice, communication, but evidently these student's projects
did not complete to integration (time/quality), and nobody/nothing
stepped up to take them behind the goal line outside GSoC.
So _how_ do you, Danil, propose, concretely, to organize the required
items (resources, expertise, acceptance) to get those half-finished
items completed and integrated?
Else the GSoC graveyard as you call it is the dignified version of the
scrapyard where so many other GSoC efforts landed. And maybe it's fine
if it's something new and a prototype that everyone can learn from -
scrap it, and then redesign, and do it right -- after you've learned
from the prototype. Research is also about finding out what does not
work. GSoC does not have a success warranty implied, no project has, it
takes diligent work - and GSoC is deadline-constrained with a bit of
regard for quality (midterm review, per 2026 rules) and the overall cost
is charged to the "organization" and the mentor.
GSoC doesn't cover the second phase though, so integration of GSoC-made
material seems like a game of luck.
That being said, if your concern is mailman being valuable, what makes
you think it critical that past GSoC bits that haven't fallen into the
place you'd wished for? Why would one value a half-finished GSoC
material package more highly than Mailman?
--
Matthias Andree
_______________________________________________
Mailman-Developers mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/mailman-developers.python.org/
Mailman FAQ: https://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: https://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
