Excerpts from Christian Heimes's message of 2018-07-12 20:54:05 +0200:
> On 2018-07-12 20:50, Brett Cannon wrote:
> > IMHO the N-virate should primarily be responsible for delegation.
> > Side note: I think we'll be talking less and less about language design,
> > and instead about library and infrastructure design.
> > Same here. I suspect this will make us much more conservative in
> > accepting language changes compared to e.g. what our deprecation policy
> > should be.
> - Primary to delegate responsibilities to domain experts
> - Secondary to provide consistency and trust
> - Lastly to have final word in case of controversial bike shedding
If the primary approach to decision making is to delegate unless
an arbiter is absolutely necessary, then long-term consistency and
stability comes less from finding individuals to commit to serving
for very long terms on the N-virate as it does from everyone having
a good understanding of the history of discussions and from a
willingness to keep the status quo in situations where consensus
isn't reached (note "consensus" rather than "unanimous agreement").
Building the system to support and encourage turnover, like we do
with release managers, lowers the level of effort someone is signing
up for when they agree to serve. Given the *many* discussions of
burnout in the Python community and open source in general, that
seems like an important feature.
python-committers mailing list
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/