Giovanni Bajo schrieb:
>>>> I can't see that the barrier at contributing is high. 
>>> I think this says it all. It now appears obvious to me that people 
>>> inside the "mafia" don't even realize there is one. Thus, it looks 
>>> like we are all wasting time in this thread, since they think there 
>>> is nothing to be changed.
> But I am blaming you because you don't admit the fact that there *is* a 
> problem with the patch submission process. And we can't a solve a 
> problem if we don't admit there is one in the first place.

I do think there is a problem with patch processing - I just don't
think the barrier at contributing is high. The fact that there are
so many patches contributed is proof that the barrier is not high:
many people feel they can submit a patch.

> You might be right, there's no way to really know of course. I think my 
> patch is a good example of how my proposal can be good for the Python 
> stdlib. My proposal (to recall) is to *automatically* apply any patch to 
> stdlib which follows normal guidelines if the package has no maintainer 
> and nobody objects in X days.

While it would have worked in your case (although I still wonder who
the automatic application of the patch should execute), please be
ensured that this couldn't possibly work in general. Many patches
are really really not acceptable in their initial form; for many
of them, the biggest problem is that they lack documentation.
There was a phase when patches got accepted with no documentation,
for these modules, it was very difficult to come up with documentation
in the following years.

Python-Dev mailing list

Reply via email to