Tres Seaver writes: > I'm mostly arguing the FLOSS project
You mean "a (mostly) volunteer-supported" FLOSS project, no? > should feel free to ignore Given the above qualification, you can put a period here, as far as I'm concerned. My question is "what does *Python* *want* to ignore?", not "is it allowed to ignore?" > high-maintenance-cost What "high" maintenance cost? A stdlib addition is a marginal increase in cost. Do too many, and it's a serious burden, of course. So there needs to be *some* hurdle that any addition must clear, and that barrier becomes higher in proportion to the "code base to developers who actually do maintenance" ratio. But I think the question should be "how high?" not "can they pay?" > commercial concerns until those concerns bring either blook (funded > developer time) or treasure (pooled to pay for the same time) to > the table to pay for them. I really don't think commercial profit as the motive for a request, or ability to pay, should be an important reason to *ignore* user wants. This smacks of the proposals for "ransom software", which (a) sort of turns the principle of *volunteer* FLOSS on its head (if that doesn't bother most of the developers, no problem, but for one it bothers *me*), and (b) doesn't actually work AFAICT (it's not quite the same as "crowdfunding", which does work). It's rather the reverse: I believe we should be prepared to deal with the conflict of interest that results when *some* of the developers are offered money to provide *cater* to such concerns[1] where the community doesn't think the benefit is that high. Footnotes: [1] Should not be that hard in *this* community, but that is the issue IMO. _______________________________________________ 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
