On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Ronald Oussoren <ronaldousso...@mac.com> wrote: > > On 27 Jul, 2010, at 16:24, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > >> Le mardi 27 juillet 2010 à 07:15 -0700, Guido van Rossum a écrit : >>> Well like it or not Tarek is not going to do it. So who will? You, or >>> a new volunteer? >> >> Well, we don't even know if Éric actually volunteers for maintaining >> distutils. >> Otherwise the module will just rot as Tarek said, until distutils2 >> replaces it. This is certainly a less than optimal transition, but if >> distutils2 matures quickly enough it will not be as painful as it seems. >> (much less painful anyway than the state of distutils before Tarek >> started maintenance on it) > > It won't really rot, it won't get as much attention as when Tarek did > maintain it. We'll basicly revert to the situation before Tarek volunteered > to maintain distutils (which he did very well) > > Ronald
I too, am for MaL's suggestion that we give Eric privs, and see how it goes before signing off on him being the long-term maintainer, but I am a strong -100 on allowing distutils to fall back to the way things were. We need more people assigned/associated/feeling ownership of stdlib modules, not less. jesse _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
