Do you QA your Python? Was: 2.1 vs. 2.2

[Tim Peters]

[Tim]
>> What are you willing to do to make your desires a reality?  If it
>> doesn't involve contributing work, time or money, you just want a
>> free ride.  But nobody owes anyone a free ride, and open source
>> can't change that fact of life either.

[James Logajan]
> Not sure, but I think you are close to describing what has been
> called the tragedy of the commons.

I think that's more about a finite resource getting destroyed when there's
no cost associated with using it.  The sheer number of people using Python
doesn't cost *us* anything apart from paying for the network bandwidth to
support the downloads, and we generally view more users as a very good
thing:  more testing, more acceptance, more contributions back to the
project (although you don't like the latter, because that means change too).

The problem is more that when someone wants something for nothing, they're
limited to taking what other people are willing to give away.  If what you
want is what people freely give to Python, that works great.

> Back when I was paid to do Python work, I contributed all of US$50 (I
> think; maybe it was $20) to the PSA (I think it was called)

Bless you.  It was probably $50 (unless you went for the student rate).

> and tried to get the company I was consulting for to kick in a couple
> thousand (or a couple hundred at least). They never got around to that,
> alas.

If they're feeling guilty yet <wink>, they can sponsor the PSF instead:

    http://www.python.org/psf/

> Unfortunately I'm not sure what would be gained by contributions to a
> strategy that I have specifically stated I don't agree with.
> Further, it is  unclear how I can "contribute" to the slower pacing of
> releases that I'd like to see.

I didn't ask you to contribute to the PSF, or to PythonLabs, I asked what
you were willing to do to make *your* desires a reality.  Python is the sum
total of what everyone else has given to achieve theirs, and that's how open
source works.  If you think, for example, that Paul Rubin and Donn Cave are
on the same page as you, what are the three of you willing to do -- with or
without Guido's help?  For example, fork off 1.5.2 and release a "Guaranteed
Unchanging in Jot or Tittle until Universal Heat Death" variant.  Guido
doesn't have time for that, and none of the current volunteers appear to
have any interest it.  If you say there's a market for it, do something
about it, or talk a group of like-minded people into doing it for you.
Charge money for it, if you like -- the Python license is very liberal, and
you take all of it without paying anyone a penny for it.

> I've overstayed my welcome here,

You haven't overstayed mine <wink>.

> but before I go I'd like to thank you for your efforts to advance
> Python and I wish you well in your endeavors.

Thanks, and to you too.  I expect there is agreement that it would be nice
if commercial users had a better way to proceed, but I don't see a way to
get there from here unless commercial users step up to the plate and do work
to make that happen.  The idea that Python will freeze, like sh or awk,
isn't going to happen.