python-dev summary, Jan. 16-31

[Carel Fellinger]

Andrew Kuchling <akuchlin at mems-exchange.org> wrote:

> Envoi
> =====

> This will be the last python-dev summary I write, accounting for its
> rushed and sketchy quality.

This is really, really, really sad news!
You know, by reading your nice wrapups on the discussions in python-dev
I better understood why things changed as they did.  And more over it
gave me a good community feeling, it opened up the development process
to us mere mortals:)

> The goal of these summaries has been to make the discussions on
> python-dev more visible to the community, letting people offer timely
> comments while a thread is still reasonably current and fresh in
> memory.  Unfortunately that doesn't seem to happen, and no messages to

I guess that you did to good a job, your wrapups informed me that new
proposals were thouroughly discussed, and mostly the objections I had
I shared with someone more knowledgable *and* involved in the development
so no need to react.

> The release of 2.1 offers a second calibration on their effectiveness.
> 2.1 is the first Python release to have been carried out using PEPs as
> the mechanism, so there are no sizable changes in 2.1 that don't have
> a corresponding PEP.  Yet many people were *surprised* by some of the
> changes in Python 2.1 such as function attributes and nested scopes,
> even though PEPs were written and discussed, often in lengthy threads
> months ago.  

To me that's because the status of the  PEPS isn't cristal clear.
You have to frequent the PEPS status page and keep an eye on changes
there.  It would be much easier (for me atleast:) if someone (you again:)
would inform us that the status of a PEP changed.


I know all the needed info is availeble right now, but I've to go out
(on the net) and go over lots of messages just to get the info you
summed up so nicely for me all those months.  Prior to your wrapups
I really had no idea were Python development was heading, so I really
liked it.
-- 
groetjes, carel