Re: Proposal for Django Core Sprints

Hi Andrew, Thanks also to you for your very detailed answer. On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 1:54 AM Andrew Godwin wrote: > ... trying to organise an additional in-person event that a large number of > contributors are expected to go to is difficult I am aware that this proposal of mine to the

Re: Proposal for Django Core Sprints

Hi James, First of all, thank you for your feedback. On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 1:10 AM James Bennett wrote: > * They should be designed around the assumption of remote-first, not "hybrid" > or in-person-first, ... My proposal is that of hybrid sprints for the reasons I have listed in my

Re: Proposal for Django Core Sprints

Hi Paolo, I do like the overall idea - a few thoughts below. My first concern for this, which somewhat echoes James, is that trying to organise an additional in-person event that a large number of contributors are expected to go to is difficult. Funding considerations are one concern - we

Draft Steering Council DEP

Hi all, As a followup to my previous post about potential changes to the Technical Board - for which I thank you all for the feedback - I have taken the process to the next step and written a draft DEP: https://github.com/django/deps/pull/75/files (If you wish to see the DEP with styling, it

Re: Proposal for Django Core Sprints

Organizing sprints is a fine idea, but: * They should be designed around the assumption of remote-first, not "hybrid" or in-person-first, and there should be no language in the description whatsoever about in-person participation being important. There simply are too many factors involved in

Re: Changing the role of the Technical Board

My intention is indeed for us to run a new Technical Board election come the end of 4.2, with much better and more explicit communication about what will be expected of the new members, and a larger candidate pool to pull from to hopefully make that work. I will be posting my actual proposed

Re: Changing the role of the Technical Board

On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 12:02 PM Andrew Godwin wrote: > At this point, it is my view that it is our job to govern with the people > we have, and the time and energy they can provide, and that's my intention > with these suggested changes. > If the problem in front of us is that the Technical

Proposal for Django Core Sprints

Hi everyone, Following Andrew Godwin's example, I too share with you a proposal that I made during DjangoCon US 2022 and that I have already shared with some of you. Inspired by an article by Will Vincent, I wrote my proposal for Django Core Sprints, and its genesis, in an article and would also

Re: Changing the role of the Technical Board

I agree the Technical Board has not followed the letter of DEP 10, and I think the things you have highlighted are all valid failings, but I want to focus on - what should we do to remedy them? Given the lack of candidates we already have, if we ditch the current Board and try to elect a new

Re: Changing the role of the Technical Board

I'm going to avoid trying to get too much into point-by-point back-and-forth argument here, and try to present the larger picture. The Technical Board has multiple active responsibilities under DEP 10. Let's look at some of them: 1. Canvas for feature proposals once per feature release of

Proposal: Clarify individual members page

Along the lines of discussions about redefining requirements for board seats (e.g. https://groups.google.com/g/django-developers/c/FbNaAq3rz6c), I think it would be helpful to clarify what we want from individual members of the DSF here:

Re: #21978 include production-ready web server

IMHO, adding YAML support would introduce a dependency that's not needed: why not just use Python, instead of ini/yaml/toml? Projects could have a (.gitignore) env.py that settings.py imports and then sets the appropriate variables from it. You can use straight assignment, e.g.

Re: Creating internal/admin pages without Models

Hi Carlton, While django-admin-views indeed gives us the option to add custom views, it still is locked to the App/Model based organisation which reflects the DB. Moreover, it still necessitates that I build the page by hand. I'm interested to

Re: #21978 include production-ready web server

Hi Pete, this does look interesting. And I agree that this is something that would be nice to have in core in one form or another. That said I think we have to do it iteratively (ie in smaller parts) and evaluate along the way. Since you asked for feedback, I'll tell you what I'd do