On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Tarek Ziadé <ziade.ta...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:38 AM, R. David Murray <rdmur...@bitdance.com> > wrote: >> It has been mentioned here that some bugs languish in the tracker because >> there is no one willing to say "yes" or "no" to them. In at least some >> cases this may be because it is unclear who the best person is to ask >> for a decision when the participants in the issue don't feel qualified >> to decide. And in some cases, some of the people it may be unclear to >> may be the very people who _could_ decide...if only they knew that they >> were the closest thing to an expert on that module that we have. >> >> In a discussion on IRC we came up with a proposal for a simple tool that >> might help out in this situation. I would like to propose that we create >> a file, tentatively named MISC/maintainers.txt, that contains two tables: >> (1) a table of all the modules in the standard library and (2) a table of >> 'areas of expertise' (things like Unicode, arithmetic, etc). Table (2) >> would be the simpler, and would just list people who felt they had >> enough expertise in the given area to be willing to make judgement >> calls on relevant issues on request. > > That would be a third source of info about who maintains what. > > If this file is created it should maybe override and cover what PEP > 360 and PEP 291 provides > > - some modules/packages backward compatibility infos > - a list of externally maintained packages > > (some of these info are a bit outdated though)
Oh man, those are dated. json isn't even in there. _______________________________________________ stdlib-sig mailing list stdlib-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/stdlib-sig
