On 07/13/2018 04:20 PM, Steve Dower wrote:
On 13Jul2018 1600, Larry Hastings wrote:
I disagree. My proposal for Python's Council Of Elders is partially
based on the Supreme Court Of The United States. For example, SCOTUS
judges are appointed for life, and I think PCOE members should be too.
When SCOTUS renders a decision:
* the deliberation is held in private, but then
* the judges cast their votes,
* the "winning" side writes up the official decision, called "the
Court's opinion",
* and any member may contribute their own individual opinion,
concurring /or/ dissenting, and finally
* all votes and opinions contributed to the decision are made public.
I agree with Larry, at least until the point at which we see "the
public" aggressively idolising or demonising those members of the
Council with whom they agree/disagree. Then I'll change my mind :)
Despite the smiley etc, this is a reasonable point. But! I think it's
inevitable. As the BDFL Guido received more than his fair share of
idolatry and demonization (cf. the PEP 572 discussion). It's a natural
consequence of having identifiable people in charge of a project as
popular as Python. Having the PCOE keep its votes / dissent private
wouldn't eliminate the consequences of fame for its members--all I'd
expect is that it'd be more evenly distributed.
//arry/
_______________________________________________
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/
