The big shots

[castironpi at gmail.com]

On Feb 20, 1:14 pm, Kay Schluehr <kay.schlu... at gmx.net> wrote:
> On 19 Feb., 04:14, castiro... at gmail.com wrote:
>
> > The printing press, rail, automobiles, and Python, were not in
> > prevalent use before their invention.
>
> True but automobiles fuelled with newspapers and driven by Pythons
> still aren't. Right?
>
> Not entirely sure what you are after but it sounds much like the quite
> familiar Guido-doesn't-give-Python-newbies-enough-freedom-to-change-
> the-language father complex.

Now -that- makes sense.  I'm asking him to change and do something
different.  I can see how that would take a lot of patient
persuading.  Clearly I don't know what it is that goes into other
proposals either.  But why am I not getting the same responses that
new ideas from others get?

My writing isn't unclear, just watered-down, and perhaps takes a
tangent.

It's also pretty clear at a glance what the snippet in 'ext' does.  If
everyone is asking what extensions and abstractions I want to make, I
may be in the minority in how open I am to contributions.  As it
stands it's pretty good too.

If the concern is not merely what goes in, but what the authors do
with the status that grants, that's something that I can not say or
show you without consistency and establishing myself in a reliable
place; it's not that they want to keep every half-baked idea out of
the std. lib., it's that they want to keep the credit somewhat
unified, and who it goes to is important.  I understand; just say so--
"no, not from you, until we meet you."

The unified-credit wish may not even be vicious, and actually be
rational, if the consequences come back on the language's reputation,
and that reputation extends outside and beyond of its de facto
merits.  If there's a mystique and mystery surrounding it, that the
"big wigs" value, then that explains the "yes but who" reaction.  But
other things might too, so I'm not pointing fingers.  A=> B; A; |||
B.  A?