Surely you can show empathy and still explain why it's not that easy. On Mar 27, 2014 2:11 AM, "Maciej Fijalkowski" <fij...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 27 March 2014 08:16, Maciej Fijalkowski <fij...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> And random pieces of C included in the standard library can be > >> shuffled under the carpet under the disguise of upgrade or what are > >> you suggesting? > > > > The sort of thing that happens is that the relevant approvers will > > accept python-dev as a "trusted supplier" and then Python upgrades are > > acceptable subject to review of the changes, etc. For a new module, > > there is a whole other level of questions around how do we trust the > > person who developed the code, do we need to do a full code review, > > etc? > > > > It's a bit unfair to describe the process as "random pieces of C" > > being "shuffled under the carpet". (Although there probably are > > environments where that is uncomfortably close to the truth :-() > > > > Paul > > I just find "my company is stupid so let's work around it by putting > stuff to python standard library" unacceptable argument for python-dev > and all the python community. >
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
