[python-committers] Vote to promote Pablo Salingo Salgado as core developer

[Victor Stinner]

2018-06-14 0:26 GMT+02:00 Berker Peksağ <berker.peksag at gmail.com>:
> I don't care about total number of commits to be honest. It's not so
> hard to get 50 PRs merged into master in a month or so.

Wait, what? No developer got more than 50 commits merged into master
in less than one month.

Stats between May, 1st and today (one month and a half, longer than
one month), top 5
---
39 Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka at gmail.com>
31 Victor Stinner <vstinner at redhat.com>
24 Yury Selivanov <yury at magic.io>
18 Andrés Delfino <adelfino at gmail.com>
16 Ned Deily <nad at python.org>
---

Statistics on the master branch between September 1st, 2017 and today,
developers with at least 20 commits:
---
221 Serhiy Storchaka
221 Victor Stinner
89 Yury Selivanov
67 Ned Deily
60 Benjamin Peterson
56 Terry Jan Reedy
51 Christian Heimes
41 Eric V. Smith
41 INADA Naoki
37 Antoine Pitrou
36 Raymond Hettinger
35 Steve Dower
34 Cheryl Sabella
34 Andrew Svetlov
31 Oren Milman
29 Barry Warsaw
26 xdegaye
24 Andrés Delfino
22 Eric Snow
21 Pablo Galindo
20 Berker Peksag
---

But if you ignore core developers, here is the top 6 most active contributors:
---
34 Cheryl Sabella
31 Oren Milman
24 Andrés Delfino
21 Pablo Galindo
18 Zackery Spytz
9 Paul Ganssle
---

I let you look at each commit to estimate how much time each
contributor has spent on Python.

Note: Oh, it seems like Pablo got one commit as a different name but
with same email ("Author: Dargor <Pablogsal at gmail.com>"). The correct
number for Pablo is 22.

Note2: Pablo got 2 more commits merged into master (22) than Berker (20) ;-)


> [1] According to bpo, Pablo has been active in 38 issues:

It seems that he is active, if not very active, on the bug tracker,
no? But how can I compare this number to other core developers or
other contributors?


> Writing high quality code is not the only requirement to become a core developer.
> IMO, being active on bugs.p.o [1] and reviewing pull requests on
> GitHub [2] are more important than writing code or documentation.

I'm not sure that it works in this direction. I expect that once a
developer is promoted as a core dev, they become more active on
reviews and bug triage. It's my (personal) definition of the
additional responsibilities of a core developer. I don't see why a
contributor will spend time on reviews and bug triage before becoming
a core. Writing pull requests is a good way to learn how to produce
good reviews.

There are 90 core developers in the GitHub team: how many of them are
regularly doing reviews and bug triage? Don't expect that a new core
developer will be at least as active, if not more, than existing core
developers. I'm happy if I review 5 pull requests per week. It takes a
lot of time to review properly a PR.

As I wrote to Serhiy, IMHO you are putting the bar too high.

Our role is to mentor and guide contributors to make them feel part of
a team and feel useful by recognizing the value of their work.

Please remind that they are very few contributors with available free
time and ready to be invested in the long term.

In my experience, naturally, when a contributor is promoted, they
become more active in different areas of Python: bug tracker, mailing
list, devguide, etc.


My script to compute stats:
---
import collections
import subprocess
proc = subprocess.run(['git', 'log', '--after=2017-09-01', 'master'],
                      stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
                      universal_newlines=True)
authors = collections.Counter()
for line in proc.stdout.splitlines():
    if line.startswith('Author: '):
        line = line[8:]
        name = line.split(' <')[0]
        authors[name] += 1
for name, commits in authors.most_common():
    if commits < 5:
        break
    print(commits, name)
---

Victor