[python-committers] Pace of change for Python 3.x

[Nick Coghlan]

On 25 January 2017 at 19:28, Neil Schemenauer <nas-python at arctrix.com> wrote:
> On 2017-01-25, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
>> I think this is the next frontier for Python maintenance; we need
>> full-time core maintainers, no third parties are funding any such
>> developers, and the PSF doesn't seem interested in pursuing that.
>
> IMHO, the PSF should be doing it.  I don't know exactly how the
> Linux Foundation works but my superficial understanding is that the
> LF gets funding mostly from big companies and then directly pays
> some Linux developers.  Most notable, Linus is paid by the LF.

Right now, the PSF's more concerned by the state of PyPI and the
packaging ecosystem than they are CPython - keep in mind that one of
the main concerns being raised about CPython development is that the
pace of change is already *too high* for the rest of the ecosystem to
keep up with (just based on those of us that have obtained individual
agreements with our employers to spend part of our time on upstream
contributions), whereas improvements in the packaging tools space
(which provide a more immediate benefit to many more community
members) are severely constrained by volunteer availability.

On that front, a funding proposal is being submitted to the Mozilla
Grants program to finalize the sunsetting of the legacy web service at
pypi.python.org, and migrating all operations over to pypi.org (those
are currently running as parallel front ends to the same backing data
store, but the new one is missing maintainer facing features that mean
it isn't yet possible to shut down the old one).

Eric also correctly channeled me in that I think the right way for
people to advocate for LTS CPython releases is:

1. Pick a commercial Python redistributor
2. Start paying them for support
3. Advocate for *them* (through whatever channels they provide) to
pursue a fully funded recurring LTS model in CPython upstream

That entirely avoids the "Is this an appropriate activity for a public
interest charity to be funding?" question, and also gives commercial
redistributors a clear practical benefit that they can pitch to their
subscribers (i.e. getting fixes backported from the main line of
development to LTS versions).

Cheers,
Nick.

P.S. Since it's relevant to the conversation at hand, and we all
collectively benefit from the upstream community maintaining strong
ties with our commercial redistributors, I'll also point out that
ActiveState, one of CPython's longest term commercial redistributors
and one of the founding sponsors of the PSF, is currently hiring for a
couple of key roles in their open source languages support and
development team: http://www.activestate.com/company#careers

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia