Re: [python-committers] Commit privs for Serhiy Storchaka?
Le vendredi 28 décembre 2012 à 01:10 +0200, Serhiy Storchaka a écrit : > On 26.12.12 19:53, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > Le mercredi 26 décembre 2012 à 18:38 +0100, Georg Brandl a écrit : > >> The SSH key is added; tracker privileges were already given. > >> Welcome Serhiy! > > > > Welcome indeed (und fröhlich Weihnachten)! > > Thank you. But you have something mixed up, Antoine. ;) Je n'ai pas > l'allemand. That was a minor wink in Georg's general direction ;) Regards Antoine. ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
[python-committers] MSDN subscriptions - new or renew
Hi all, Before we begin: please respond directly to me. I've gotten a few requests for MSDN subscription renewals, so I may as well do a big call out to try and do this as a big group to make it easier on MS. If you're due/overdue for a renewal, send me the email address you use to login and the Subscriber ID -- this is found at https://msdn.microsoft.com/subscriptions/manage/ when you're logged in. If you do not currently have an MSDN subscription but are interested, Microsoft's Open Source Technology Center provides our contributors with free MSDN subscriptions to allow you to get OS and Visual Studio installers/licenses. Please provide the following information if you're interested: First Name: Last Name: Email Address: Project/Company: Python Software Foundation Complete Mailing Address: Phone Number: Since the Microsoft employee who helps us with this is unlikely to respond right away due to the holidays, I'm going to gather up details and send them on 2 January, 2013. After he responds, it typically takes one week before you receive login details. Brian ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] MSDN subscriptions - new or renew
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I was wondering if we could ask Oracle (pufff) about Solaris 10/11 patch support :-?. - -- Jesús Cea Avión _/_/ _/_/_/_/_/_/ [email protected] - http://www.jcea.es/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/ jabber / xmpp:[email protected] _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/_/ . _/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "Things are not so easy" _/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/ "My name is Dump, Core Dump" _/_/_/_/_/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQCVAwUBUN3OdZlgi5GaxT1NAQIPuAQAlyi4uQhy4DMHs36vShD3/RTzeb7R/5Vu /00qz35UNYQz9qt8cPO4Fl5m0tecg1kVOkOy7Qrd3dTivHgD3F15cXajQuyJBOaT Vvrck3XTWMCP2qgk0gkKmKLYtRsTR6z5goRCpg9/1AGFaP4AuV6FOuL4dtv5+eV7 P1XLhX4l3FQ= =t2tp -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Chris Jerdonek wrote: > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:28 AM, R. David Murray > wrote: > >> > >> On 12/25/2012 5:56 PM, Łukasz Langa wrote: > >> > I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely > >> > without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the > >> > future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if > >> > only for transparency reasons. > >> > >> This strike me as over-reaction. > > > > I'm not at all sure that it is, but that "most likely" had better be > > replaced by "most certainly". Such a policy needs to rest on fundamental > > principles. "Bad cases make bad law", so one must be careful not to > > craft a policy to deal only with a specific egregious thing, but rather > > craft something that will serve well in the general cases. Specifically, > > any such policy, and any statement made if we take action on Anatoly, > will > > have to address the inevitable calls that we are engaging in censorship. > > There are principled answers to that charge, but we must decide which > > of them we are following and why, and articulate that clearly and > > consistently. > > +1. It might seem bureaucratic to some, but I think grounding actions > in due process and documented policy is important. The Diversity > Statement is a good example of this. (That statement has a different > purpose though. It's more about something we want rather than how to > handle something we don't want.): > > http://www.python.org/community/diversity/ > > What is CoC by the way? > Code of Conduct. -Brett > > > As an aside, it has occurred to me that the fundamental problem here is > > that we do not feel that Anatoly respects *us*. So it is no wonder that > > we are offended and do not respect him. > > FWIW, I've found him to be more what I'd call spammy/annoying and > lacking in some areas rather than disrespectful (opening many issues > with vague descriptions, starting more than his share of threads on > python-ideas, etc). So I've never felt offended. Granted, I'm > relatively new to being involved and don't follow him closely. I > quickly learned to pass over most of what he writes for lack of time. > It's a source of amazement to me that what he writes sometimes leads > to something productive. > This is where I disagree with everyone who is defending Anatoly as someone who can be redeemed and given yet another chance to allow him to continue to poison the community where he participates because he is just "annoying". On python-dev I checked my email on Xmas morning to an email from Anatoly where he said "What should I do in case Eric lost interest after his GSoC project for PSF appeared as useless for python-dev community". That is not "spammy/annoying" but flat-out disrespectful and rude. I think I was the first person to publicly state I put Anatoly's email into the trash after he publicly said the PSF board should be completely disbanded and we should restructure the PSF because he viewed it as worthless. That was not annoying but disrespectful. We have spent **years** trying to get him to be more productive and yet he manages to not to. He flat-out refuses to sign any contributor agreement and expects us to do all the work and gets mad when we don't spend our free time fixing what he wants us to. He won't even search the internet for prior discussions as David has pointed out. That's not annoying but disrespectful. I fully understand that we are all nice people and don't want to do anything drastic, but simply ignoring him doesn't solve the issue for new people to the community who come to python-ideas, python-dev, or even the tracker on occasion and actually take the time to read his emails, reply, etc. and don't realize that a decent chunk of core developers never even see their responses as the entire thread has already been deleted/muted in the core dev's inbox. If I was new and spent some time replying to a thread only to find out that the person was being ignored and thus my hard work as well I would be frustrated. In order to deal with this, here is my proposal that should placate those of us calling for a ban now and those that feel like there has not been enough of a warning ((I can't communicate with him because I want him banned and I personally don't get along with him even in person, so any place where someone should talk to him it can't be me in the name of fairness to the process): 1. Someone emails Anatoly to tell him he is on indefinite probation for his behaviour where it is pointed out he can no longer insult anyone (including the PSF), he can't re-open issues without an explicit solution to the problem for why it closed, and in general has to just behave and not be rude 2. We agree to point out to him nicely and calmly when he has screwed up and overstepped his bounds while on this probation and to record when that happened (an email here about any incident should be enough) so that he can lear
Re: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Chris Jerdonek > wrote: >> >> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:28 AM, R. David Murray >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 12/25/2012 5:56 PM, Łukasz Langa wrote: >> >> > I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely >> >> > without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the >> >> > future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if >> >> > only for transparency reasons. >> >> >> >> This strike me as over-reaction. >> > >> > I'm not at all sure that it is, but that "most likely" had better be >> > replaced by "most certainly". Such a policy needs to rest on >> > fundamental >> > principles. "Bad cases make bad law", so one must be careful not to >> > craft a policy to deal only with a specific egregious thing, but rather >> > craft something that will serve well in the general cases. >> > Specifically, >> > any such policy, and any statement made if we take action on Anatoly, >> > will >> > have to address the inevitable calls that we are engaging in censorship. >> > There are principled answers to that charge, but we must decide which >> > of them we are following and why, and articulate that clearly and >> > consistently. >> >> +1. It might seem bureaucratic to some, but I think grounding actions >> in due process and documented policy is important. The Diversity >> Statement is a good example of this. (That statement has a different >> purpose though. It's more about something we want rather than how to >> handle something we don't want.): >> >> http://www.python.org/community/diversity/ >> >> What is CoC by the way? > > > Code of Conduct. > > -Brett > >> >> >> > As an aside, it has occurred to me that the fundamental problem here is >> > that we do not feel that Anatoly respects *us*. So it is no wonder that >> > we are offended and do not respect him. >> >> FWIW, I've found him to be more what I'd call spammy/annoying and >> lacking in some areas rather than disrespectful (opening many issues >> with vague descriptions, starting more than his share of threads on >> python-ideas, etc). So I've never felt offended. Granted, I'm >> relatively new to being involved and don't follow him closely. I >> quickly learned to pass over most of what he writes for lack of time. >> It's a source of amazement to me that what he writes sometimes leads >> to something productive. > > > This is where I disagree with everyone who is defending Anatoly as someone > who can be redeemed and given yet another chance to allow him to continue to > poison the community where he participates because he is just "annoying". On > python-dev I checked my email on Xmas morning to an email from Anatoly where > he said "What should I do in case Eric lost interest after his GSoC project > for PSF appeared as useless for python-dev community". That is not > "spammy/annoying" but flat-out disrespectful and rude. > > I think I was the first person to publicly state I put Anatoly's email into > the trash after he publicly said the PSF board should be completely > disbanded and we should restructure the PSF because he viewed it as > worthless. That was not annoying but disrespectful. > > We have spent **years** trying to get him to be more productive and yet he > manages to not to. He flat-out refuses to sign any contributor agreement and > expects us to do all the work and gets mad when we don't spend our free time > fixing what he wants us to. He won't even search the internet for prior > discussions as David has pointed out. That's not annoying but disrespectful. > > I fully understand that we are all nice people and don't want to do anything > drastic, but simply ignoring him doesn't solve the issue for new people to > the community who come to python-ideas, python-dev, or even the tracker on > occasion and actually take the time to read his emails, reply, etc. and > don't realize that a decent chunk of core developers never even see their > responses as the entire thread has already been deleted/muted in the core > dev's inbox. If I was new and spent some time replying to a thread only to > find out that the person was being ignored and thus my hard work as well I > would be frustrated. > > In order to deal with this, here is my proposal that should placate those of > us calling for a ban now and those that feel like there has not been enough > of a warning ((I can't communicate with him because I want him banned and I > personally don't get along with him even in person, so any place where > someone should talk to him it can't be me in the name of fairness to the > process): > > 1. Someone emails Anatoly to tell him he is on indefinite probation for his > behaviour where it is pointed out he can no longer insult anyone (including > the PSF), he can't re-open issues without an explicit solution to the > problem for why it closed, and in general has to just behave and not be rude > > 2. We agree to po
Re: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution
I would caution against using hypothetical "new people" (that maybe possibly could be offended in some way that might create harm either to that person or the community) as a reason for taking this action. Does anyone know if this has actually occurred? And in any significant numbers? I see a group of hard working core developers that are frustrated quite legitimately and struggling with policing the content of official message boards, but that energy might push you in directions that are more harmful than not. Be sure of who you are acting against, the person more than the emails. There is strong incidence of mental illness in the tech community and there are also persons with significantly different email personalities than actual personality. I see Anatoly as someone who isn't a mean person but might not be a proper communicator. Openness and inclusion is a higher good than censorship and elitism. Best, John. On Dec 28, 2012, at 9:38 PM, Chris Jerdonek wrote: > On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Chris Jerdonek >> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:28 AM, R. David Murray >>> wrote: > > On 12/25/2012 5:56 PM, Łukasz Langa wrote: >> I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely >> without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the >> future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if >> only for transparency reasons. > > This strike me as over-reaction. I'm not at all sure that it is, but that "most likely" had better be replaced by "most certainly". Such a policy needs to rest on fundamental principles. "Bad cases make bad law", so one must be careful not to craft a policy to deal only with a specific egregious thing, but rather craft something that will serve well in the general cases. Specifically, any such policy, and any statement made if we take action on Anatoly, will have to address the inevitable calls that we are engaging in censorship. There are principled answers to that charge, but we must decide which of them we are following and why, and articulate that clearly and consistently. >>> >>> +1. It might seem bureaucratic to some, but I think grounding actions >>> in due process and documented policy is important. The Diversity >>> Statement is a good example of this. (That statement has a different >>> purpose though. It's more about something we want rather than how to >>> handle something we don't want.): >>> >>> http://www.python.org/community/diversity/ >>> >>> What is CoC by the way? >> >> >> Code of Conduct. >> >> -Brett >> >>> >>> As an aside, it has occurred to me that the fundamental problem here is that we do not feel that Anatoly respects *us*. So it is no wonder that we are offended and do not respect him. >>> >>> FWIW, I've found him to be more what I'd call spammy/annoying and >>> lacking in some areas rather than disrespectful (opening many issues >>> with vague descriptions, starting more than his share of threads on >>> python-ideas, etc). So I've never felt offended. Granted, I'm >>> relatively new to being involved and don't follow him closely. I >>> quickly learned to pass over most of what he writes for lack of time. >>> It's a source of amazement to me that what he writes sometimes leads >>> to something productive. >> >> >> This is where I disagree with everyone who is defending Anatoly as someone >> who can be redeemed and given yet another chance to allow him to continue to >> poison the community where he participates because he is just "annoying". On >> python-dev I checked my email on Xmas morning to an email from Anatoly where >> he said "What should I do in case Eric lost interest after his GSoC project >> for PSF appeared as useless for python-dev community". That is not >> "spammy/annoying" but flat-out disrespectful and rude. >> >> I think I was the first person to publicly state I put Anatoly's email into >> the trash after he publicly said the PSF board should be completely >> disbanded and we should restructure the PSF because he viewed it as >> worthless. That was not annoying but disrespectful. >> >> We have spent **years** trying to get him to be more productive and yet he >> manages to not to. He flat-out refuses to sign any contributor agreement and >> expects us to do all the work and gets mad when we don't spend our free time >> fixing what he wants us to. He won't even search the internet for prior >> discussions as David has pointed out. That's not annoying but disrespectful. >> >> I fully understand that we are all nice people and don't want to do anything >> drastic, but simply ignoring him doesn't solve the issue for new people to >> the community who come to python-ideas, python-dev, or even the tracker on >> occasion and actually take the time to read hi
Re: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 4:15 PM, John Benediktsson wrote: > I would caution against using hypothetical "new people" (that maybe possibly > could be offended in some way that might create harm either to that person or > the community) as a reason for taking this action. Does anyone know if this > has actually occurred? And in any significant numbers? > > I see a group of hard working core developers that are frustrated quite > legitimately and struggling with policing the content of official message > boards, but that energy might push you in directions that are more harmful > than not. > > Be sure of who you are acting against, the person more than the emails. > There is strong incidence of mental illness in the tech community and there > are also persons with significantly different email personalities than actual > personality. I didn't actually "meet" him so to speak, he just spoke at me and a group of others...so it was no different than what typically occurred via email/tracker. ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution
Le vendredi 28 décembre 2012 à 22:15 +, John Benediktsson a écrit : > Be sure of who you are acting against, the person more than the > emails. There is strong incidence of mental illness in the tech > community and there are also persons with significantly different > email personalities than actual personality. > > I see Anatoly as someone who isn't a mean person but might not be a > proper communicator. The question is not whether Anatoly is mean or ill-motivated, or what his "actual" personality is, but whether his online behaviour should be perpetually accepted. Anatoly has often been disruptive, taking up precious contributor time for petty controversies. Perhaps ideally there's a way to make Anatoly aware of his communication problems and help him change for the better, but so far nobody's been able to achieve that. Regards Antoine. ___ python-committers mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
Re: [python-committers] Anatoly Techtonik's contribution
On Dec 28, 2012 4:38 PM, "Chris Jerdonek" wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Chris Jerdonek < [email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:28 AM, R. David Murray > >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On 12/25/2012 5:56 PM, Łukasz Langa wrote: > >> >> > I'm seriously considering writing all this as a PEP (most likely > >> >> > without any personal details). I hope this won't be useful in the > >> >> > future but it might help having this gathered as written policy, if > >> >> > only for transparency reasons. > >> >> > >> >> This strike me as over-reaction. > >> > > >> > I'm not at all sure that it is, but that "most likely" had better be > >> > replaced by "most certainly". Such a policy needs to rest on > >> > fundamental > >> > principles. "Bad cases make bad law", so one must be careful not to > >> > craft a policy to deal only with a specific egregious thing, but rather > >> > craft something that will serve well in the general cases. > >> > Specifically, > >> > any such policy, and any statement made if we take action on Anatoly, > >> > will > >> > have to address the inevitable calls that we are engaging in censorship. > >> > There are principled answers to that charge, but we must decide which > >> > of them we are following and why, and articulate that clearly and > >> > consistently. > >> > >> +1. It might seem bureaucratic to some, but I think grounding actions > >> in due process and documented policy is important. The Diversity > >> Statement is a good example of this. (That statement has a different > >> purpose though. It's more about something we want rather than how to > >> handle something we don't want.): > >> > >> http://www.python.org/community/diversity/ > >> > >> What is CoC by the way? > > > > > > Code of Conduct. > > > > -Brett > > > >> > >> > >> > As an aside, it has occurred to me that the fundamental problem here is > >> > that we do not feel that Anatoly respects *us*. So it is no wonder that > >> > we are offended and do not respect him. > >> > >> FWIW, I've found him to be more what I'd call spammy/annoying and > >> lacking in some areas rather than disrespectful (opening many issues > >> with vague descriptions, starting more than his share of threads on > >> python-ideas, etc). So I've never felt offended. Granted, I'm > >> relatively new to being involved and don't follow him closely. I > >> quickly learned to pass over most of what he writes for lack of time. > >> It's a source of amazement to me that what he writes sometimes leads > >> to something productive. > > > > > > This is where I disagree with everyone who is defending Anatoly as someone > > who can be redeemed and given yet another chance to allow him to continue to > > poison the community where he participates because he is just "annoying". On > > python-dev I checked my email on Xmas morning to an email from Anatoly where > > he said "What should I do in case Eric lost interest after his GSoC project > > for PSF appeared as useless for python-dev community". That is not > > "spammy/annoying" but flat-out disrespectful and rude. > > > > I think I was the first person to publicly state I put Anatoly's email into > > the trash after he publicly said the PSF board should be completely > > disbanded and we should restructure the PSF because he viewed it as > > worthless. That was not annoying but disrespectful. > > > > We have spent **years** trying to get him to be more productive and yet he > > manages to not to. He flat-out refuses to sign any contributor agreement and > > expects us to do all the work and gets mad when we don't spend our free time > > fixing what he wants us to. He won't even search the internet for prior > > discussions as David has pointed out. That's not annoying but disrespectful. > > > > I fully understand that we are all nice people and don't want to do anything > > drastic, but simply ignoring him doesn't solve the issue for new people to > > the community who come to python-ideas, python-dev, or even the tracker on > > occasion and actually take the time to read his emails, reply, etc. and > > don't realize that a decent chunk of core developers never even see their > > responses as the entire thread has already been deleted/muted in the core > > dev's inbox. If I was new and spent some time replying to a thread only to > > find out that the person was being ignored and thus my hard work as well I > > would be frustrated. > > > > In order to deal with this, here is my proposal that should placate those of > > us calling for a ban now and those that feel like there has not been enough > > of a warning ((I can't communicate with him because I want him banned and I > > personally don't get along with him even in person, so any place where > > someone should talk to him it can't be me in the name of fairness to the > > process): > > > > 1. Someone emails Anatoly to tell him he is on
