[Edu-sig] Future of CP4E after CNRI?

[Guido van Rossum]

[Oops, I didn't read all of Dinu's mail.]

> So, there is an emphasis shift
> which is not being quite well addressed, I believe, leave 
> alone communicated to this particular target group.

It's not just this target group -- we're forced to leave everybody
pretty much in the dark about the negotiations.  That's unfortunately
how negotiations work -- you only go to the press if you think it will
improve your position. :-(

> And, yes, companies are expected to do marketing to be able 
> to address their target group well! Again, I haven't claimed
> anything else. But I think it's fair to point out that this
> shift to "going commercial" comes with a whole new series of 
> closed-doors decissions no matter how many "open" labels you 
> stick on it. Just look at the following quote: ;-)

You have no idea how many closed-doors decisions went on at CNRI.  And
I can't tell you (or I would have to kill you), but believe me, BeOpen
is a heaven of openness compared to CNRI!

> Of course, "the community" could always do more with it than
> it actually does. Of course, I could start writing my own
> CP4E.py book like Per Brinch Hansen wrote his P4E.java book
> http://www.springer-ny.com/catalog/np/feb99np/0-387-98683-9.html
> which is, BTW, very much in the spirit of CP4E...

Thanks for the reference!  I should buy a copy.

> The difference is that without a higher committment provi-
> ding some focus and identity for this community in the sense 
> of an umbrella project and leading "evangelists" (marketing, 
> so to say) this is rather pointless. Without these two ele-
> ments, I'm afraid, CP4E as a Python-centric movement will 
> cease to exist. 

And given the level of funding CNRI / DARPA had apportioned for CP4E,
the same was happening at CNRI -- this is the reason why I left!  In
fact, they were also withdrawing funding from Python, and we felt more
and more like Python wasn't wanted any more...

> So, what we can at least ask for is if BeOpen has any ex-
> pressed or implied intent to provide some shelter for CP4E
> and what form that could take or if it will be entirely 
> "released" to the community, which I would read then as 
> "discontinued"? 

Active work on it will be discontinued, unless you have a rich uncle
who's willing to invest in BeOpen, or unless the work is important to
some other paying customer, or unless it is relevant for Python in
general (since "core Python development" *is* what we are going to
do).  However, we will continue to host CP4E resources (existing and
new) created by others, as part of the general hosting of Python
resources.  Again, I wish I could promise more, but that's all we can
do for now.

> With all the lawyers still working on the shift to BeOpen it 
> might be unrealistic to get a response quickly, but I think
> some statement in the very near future would be appreciated.

I've just answered.  I'd be happy to go into more detail if you have
more questions.

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://dinsdale.python.org/~guido/)