Phillip J. Eby wrote:
At 03:57 AM 3/19/2008 -0500, Jeff Rush wrote:
I'd be willing to help out, and keep a carefully balanced hand in
what is accepted.
I'm not sure exactly how to go about such a handoff though. My guess
is that we need a bug/patch tracker, and a few people to review,
test, and apply. Maybe a transitional period during which I just say
yea or nay and let others do the test and apply, before opening it up
entirely. That way, we can perhaps solidify a few principles that
I'd like to have stay in place. (Like no arbitrary post-install code hooks.)
+1 to blessing more people to commit.
+1 to the transition period idea.
These two ought to enable things to move a bit quicker than taking a
year to accept a patch. :-)
In addition to a bug tracker and patch manager, seems like perhaps a
wiki to help document some of these solidified principles and other
notes would be a good thing. (Like a patch should almost always include
at least one test, possibly more.) Given that the source for setuptools
is in the python.org svn, couldn't we just use the python.org roundup
and wiki for these facilities? Though looking at the list of
components, it seems that things in the sandbox generally aren't tracked
in this infrastructure. In which case, I'm sure we could use sf,
launchpad, or some such external provider. Enthought could even host
this stuff.
Like Jeff Rush, I'm also willing to help out as both a writer and
reviewer of patches. As you can see from my earlier posts there are a
number of things (besides running an arbitrary post-install script) that
we'd like to be able to get into the codebase.
-- Dave
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
