On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 at 19:38 Tim Peters <tim.pet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [Tim] > >> If they tied, that's fine too. Ties favor the status quo (same as if the >>> proposed change had been rejected). For that reason, I'm not even wedded >>> to an odd number. >>> >> > [Brett Cannon] > >> That's a good point. Since this is typically going to be a yes/no >> question instead of an A/B question, ties that go in favour of the status >> quo aren't a stalemate issue. >> > > Thanks for reading my mind :-) I certainly didn't spell it out. > Just glad I still have the knack for it on occasion. :) > > Predictably contentious A/B issues, like how to allocate limited resources > (how much do we spend on grants vs sponsoring conferences?), are mostly in > the PSF's court. Likewise A/B decisions with legal consequences (now that > the DPRK has ruled the PSF license counterrevolutionary, which license > should we use there instead?). > > Guido's most visible (well, to us committers) BDFL role has been in > "yes/no", "go/nogo" language/library design questions, which don't even > overlap with the PSF's proper concerns. > > But I'm not sure it's fully appreciated just how active Guido has been in > those at times. The "accepted/rejected" at the end of major PEPs is just a > small part of that. Along the way, e.g., it's been pretty common to see a > "Save your breath. That's not going to happen." from Guido to end a > distracting alternative (sub)proposal persistently promoted by one (or a > few) very active and/or loquacious posters. > IOW the design guidance he provided as the discussion progressed and his thoughts evolved/formed on the topic. > > Those "small" pronouncements typically go by with little notice except by > those shut down, but may well be crucial in keeping productive discussion > going at all. And they need to be timely to do any good. Whoever makes > such decisions needs to be down in the mud, wrestling with the issues while > they're hot topics, not judging at leisure weeks (or even days) later. > > I'm not sure "a committee" can do that at all. Then again, there seems to > be consensus that the current PEP discussion process is sometimes broken > anyway, even with a BDFL. > There are definitely perks to having a BDFL such as timely shutdown of side threads, consistency/guidance in design, etc.
_______________________________________________ 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/
