On 25 January 2017 at 19:28, Neil Schemenauer <nas-pyt...@arctrix.com> wrote: > On 2017-01-25, A.M. Kuchling wrote: >> I think this is the next frontier for Python maintenance; we need >> full-time core maintainers, no third parties are funding any such >> developers, and the PSF doesn't seem interested in pursuing that. > > IMHO, the PSF should be doing it. I don't know exactly how the > Linux Foundation works but my superficial understanding is that the > LF gets funding mostly from big companies and then directly pays > some Linux developers. Most notable, Linus is paid by the LF.
Right now, the PSF's more concerned by the state of PyPI and the packaging ecosystem than they are CPython - keep in mind that one of the main concerns being raised about CPython development is that the pace of change is already *too high* for the rest of the ecosystem to keep up with (just based on those of us that have obtained individual agreements with our employers to spend part of our time on upstream contributions), whereas improvements in the packaging tools space (which provide a more immediate benefit to many more community members) are severely constrained by volunteer availability. On that front, a funding proposal is being submitted to the Mozilla Grants program to finalize the sunsetting of the legacy web service at pypi.python.org, and migrating all operations over to pypi.org (those are currently running as parallel front ends to the same backing data store, but the new one is missing maintainer facing features that mean it isn't yet possible to shut down the old one). Eric also correctly channeled me in that I think the right way for people to advocate for LTS CPython releases is: 1. Pick a commercial Python redistributor 2. Start paying them for support 3. Advocate for *them* (through whatever channels they provide) to pursue a fully funded recurring LTS model in CPython upstream That entirely avoids the "Is this an appropriate activity for a public interest charity to be funding?" question, and also gives commercial redistributors a clear practical benefit that they can pitch to their subscribers (i.e. getting fixes backported from the main line of development to LTS versions). Cheers, Nick. P.S. Since it's relevant to the conversation at hand, and we all collectively benefit from the upstream community maintaining strong ties with our commercial redistributors, I'll also point out that ActiveState, one of CPython's longest term commercial redistributors and one of the founding sponsors of the PSF, is currently hiring for a couple of key roles in their open source languages support and development team: http://www.activestate.com/company#careers -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
