Guido van Rossum added the comment:

The term "well defined" would not resonate with people looking for starter
bugs. Read this piece for an overview of how other projects (esp. Mozilla)
try to lure new contributors, and how that's seen by someone eager to

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:18 AM, Nick Coghlan <> wrote:

> Nick Coghlan added the comment:
> If we're tinkering with the "easy" tag, would it make sense to switch to a
> more objectively definable phrase like "well defined (Python)" and "well
> defined (C)"?
> The reason I ask is that good starter issues for folks that just want to
> work on CPython in general rather than having a particular problem they
> want to tackle tend to be either:
> - bugs with a clear reproducer and a relatively straightforward fix; or
> - API addition/changes that already have in principle core dev approval
> Other open issues tend to be a bit more at risk of getting bogged down in
> design discussions that go in circles or attempts to find a core dev
> willing to sign off on the change, which can be a bit disheartening for
> folks that only have limited time to contribute.
> The other reason I suggest this is that even a well defined issue may
> still be difficult for a true novice to tackle, but they will at least have
> a clear goal to aim for. For folks that are experienced devs and merely new
> to CPython specifically, the coding side may be easy for them, but they'll
> still get a chance to run through the the contribution workflow without
> having to invest too much time in seeking approval for the change itself.
> ----------
> nosy: +ncoghlan
> _______________________________________________________
> PSF Meta Tracker <>
> <>
> _______________________________________________________

PSF Meta Tracker <>
Tracker-discuss mailing list
Code of Conduct:

Reply via email to