[python-committers] Mark Lawrence

[Georg Brandl]

On 10/05/2014 11:01 PM, Ned Deily wrote:
> In article <m0sah7$4ci$1 at ger.gmane.org>,
>  Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
>> On 10/05/2014 09:36 PM, Ned Deily wrote:
>> > To me, the main issue is that the noise is not just directed at python
>> > committers but also to the python users who have submitted those issues or
>> > otherwise following them (via nosy or otherwise).  I think the risk is that
>> > his noise sends a wrong message to those users: i.e. that python-dev has
>> > suddenly taken an interest in this issue and that, by taking the time to
>> > create a patch, the issue will somehow get magically resolved.  That won't
>> > happen, of course, unless a core developer chooses to get involved. 
>> Most of the messages like "can someone look at this" don't seem to send any
>> wrong messages.
> 
> I was thinking more of the messages to non-python-dev users along the 
> lines of "Can you supply a patch?" with an implied promise that this 
> will cause the issue to be resolved, often without any particular 
> insight into whether such a patch should be written.

Submitting patches is almost never a bad idea.  But I agree the wholesale
nature of the commenting without insight into the issue is a bit worrying.

Just like the initial submission, the submission of a patch generates an
event with a certain probability of being noticed by "the right person" who'll
take it further.  I assume there are (established or aspiring) core developers
searching explicitly for issues with patch when looking for potential work.

>> > And I am uncomfortable with the risk of users potentially inferring
>> > that he is somehow a de-facto "project leader" of Python maintenance.
>> Well, those users can easily be informed about the circumstances should
>> a question arise.
> 
> How would we know?  They are likely unfamiliar with the python-dev 
> project and they receive these emails from an unknown person, sometimes 
> even offering apologies on behalf of an indefinite "we".

You're right.

>> In total, I think there's no grounds for a ban (yet), but his tone has to
>> be watched.  If hints from our side are con ignored or receive ad-hominem
>> responses, that'll change the situation in my opinion.
> 
> I dunno.  We've been down this road more than once over the years, 
> always ending in some dust-up.  I really don't think it's healthy for 
> python-dev or our users to keep repeating that.

Time for the COC overlords to chime in, I suppose.

cheers,
Georg