> IIRC in the IETF this is done by the committee chair. I think it's a
> good idea to have this be a single person to avoid endless indecision.
It then seems that this role should go to the release manager of the
upcoming feature release. Assuming Georg can accept this additional
responsibility.
Steve Holden wrote:
> The last time I was in a UK builders' yard I hear someone asking for
> "two meter pieces of two by four". At the time the UK was notionally
> metric (and the timber was planed to the nearest metric size) but the
> old names still survived.
Yeah, a 2x4 is still a 2x4 here as w
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2010/4/30 Antoine Pitrou :
>> Jesse Noller gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>> Consider this a plaintitive -1 to any sort of rule-or-decision based
>>> on committee.
>>>
>>> I'd much rather a 2x4 to the forehead.
>>
>> Oops, sorry but what does "
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Benjamin Peterson
> wrote:
>> 2010/4/30 Maciej Fijalkowski :
>>> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Benjamin Peterson
>>> wrote:
2010/4/30 Antoine Pitrou :
> Jesse Noller gmail.com> writes:
Michael Foord wrote:
> On 01/05/2010 00:08, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>> 2010/4/30 Antoine Pitrou:
>>
>>> Jesse Noller gmail.com> writes:
>>>
Consider this a plaintitive -1 to any sort of rule-or-decision based
on committee.
I'd much rather a 2x4 to the forehead.
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2010/4/30 Maciej Fijalkowski :
>> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Benjamin Peterson
>> wrote:
>>> 2010/4/30 Antoine Pitrou :
Jesse Noller gmail.com> writes:
>
> Consider this a plaintitive -1 to any sort of rule-or-decisi
2010/4/30 Maciej Fijalkowski :
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Benjamin Peterson
> wrote:
>> 2010/4/30 Antoine Pitrou :
>>> Jesse Noller gmail.com> writes:
Consider this a plaintitive -1 to any sort of rule-or-decision based
on committee.
I'd much rather a 2x4 to the
On 01/05/2010 00:10, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
2010/4/30 Antoine Pitrou:
Jesse Noller gmail.com> writes:
Consider this a plaintitive -1 to any sort of rule-or-decision based
on committee.
I'd much rather a 2x4 to t
On 01/05/2010 00:08, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
2010/4/30 Antoine Pitrou:
Jesse Noller gmail.com> writes:
Consider this a plaintitive -1 to any sort of rule-or-decision based
on committee.
I'd much rather a 2x4 to the forehead.
Oops, sorry but what does "a 2x4 to the forehea
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2010/4/30 Antoine Pitrou :
>> Jesse Noller gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>> Consider this a plaintitive -1 to any sort of rule-or-decision based
>>> on committee.
>>>
>>> I'd much rather a 2x4 to the forehead.
>>
>> Oops, sorry but what does "
2010/4/30 Antoine Pitrou :
> Jesse Noller gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> Consider this a plaintitive -1 to any sort of rule-or-decision based
>> on committee.
>>
>> I'd much rather a 2x4 to the forehead.
>
> Oops, sorry but what does "a 2x4 to the forehead" mean?
> (and "plaintitive" by the way?)
The f
Jesse Noller gmail.com> writes:
>
> Consider this a plaintitive -1 to any sort of rule-or-decision based
> on committee.
>
> I'd much rather a 2x4 to the forehead.
Oops, sorry but what does "a 2x4 to the forehead" mean?
(and "plaintitive" by the way?)
Regards
Antoine.
On Apr 30, 2010, at 3:51 PM, "Martin v. Löwis"
wrote:
As to Guido's point about the decision making process, Nick's
right. I just
want to make sure we can capture the resolution in the PEP, be it
by BDFL
pronouncement or "hey, silence is acceptance" email.
I don't think "silence is
> I see the confusion. I think Martin meant more about open issues that
> required discussion, not simply issues that had a patch ready to go.
I actually think it is perfectly fine to point out that specific issues
are need committer action on this list. This is what the list is there for.
Waitin
Steve Holden wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Without a BDFL, I think we need a committee to make decisions, e.g. by
majority vote amongst committers.
>>> Couldn't we just go with the FLUFL?
>> Not sure whether that's a serious proposal (April 1 is already some days
>> back now). As a star
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>>> Without a BDFL, I think we need a committee to make decisions, e.g. by
>>> majority vote amongst committers.
>> Couldn't we just go with the FLUFL?
>
> Not sure whether that's a serious proposal (April 1 is already some days
> back now). As a starting point, Barry would
>> Without a BDFL, I think we need a committee to make decisions, e.g. by
>> majority vote amongst committers.
>
> Couldn't we just go with the FLUFL?
Not sure whether that's a serious proposal (April 1 is already some days
back now). As a starting point, Barry would have to indicate whether he
i
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Steve Holden wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>>> As to Guido's point about the decision making process, Nick's right. I just
>>> want to make sure we can capture the resolution in the PEP, be it by BDFL
>>> pronouncement or "hey, silence is acceptance" email.
>>
>
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> As to Guido's point about the decision making process, Nick's right. I just
>> want to make sure we can capture the resolution in the PEP, be it by BDFL
>> pronouncement or "hey, silence is acceptance" email.
>
> I don't think "silence is acceptance" will work out in pra
> As to Guido's point about the decision making process, Nick's right. I just
> want to make sure we can capture the resolution in the PEP, be it by BDFL
> pronouncement or "hey, silence is acceptance" email.
I don't think "silence is acceptance" will work out in practice. For
issues where a PEP
On Apr 28, 2010, at 09:22 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 23:55, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> I believe the more important part of Barry's suggested change here is
>> requiring a link to the archived message (usually from python-dev) where
>> the PEP was accepted (be it directly by
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2010-04-23 - 2010-04-30)
Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/
To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue
number. Do NOT respond to this message.
2638 open (+41) / 17759 closed (+27) / 20397 total (+68)
Open issues with patches: 1081
Ave
On 29 Apr, 2010, at 20:28, Bill Janssen wrote:
> Michael Foord wrote:
>
>> Well - I have nine failing tests on trunk for Mac OS X with Snow Leopard.
>>
>> 9 tests failed:
>>test_cmd_line test_imp test_import test_posix test_pydoc
>>test_runpy test_urllib2 test_urllib2_localnet test_war
23 matches
Mail list logo
