[python-committers] Promote Stefan Behnel as a core developer

[Serhiy Storchaka]

I asked Stefan some questions and here is he answer.


27.03.19 10:25, Stefan Behnel пише:
> Hi Serhiy!
>
> It's actually good that you asked. Please forward this to the committers
> list for me.
>
> Serhiy Storchaka schrieb am 27.03.19 um 07:40:
>> Maybe it's my fault that I did not introduce you well enough, but there
>> were some questions.
> No problem. They are good questions, and the discussion around them was
> probably also necessary at some point.
>
>
>> Why do you want to be the core developer? Why do you
>> need these rights? Do you fully understand that this is not just rights,
>> but above all certain responsibilities.
>> Do you want to be a maintainer of the xml.etree package (and maybe other
>> XML modules)?
> I understand that it's a responsibility. I accept that responsibility, and
> yes, I think the XML packages would benefit from a couple more hands and
> heads, as would other parts of CPython. I also understand the difference
> between writing a PR and being able to merge it. :)
>
> Besides that, I think the position also gives a different standing, both in
> the circle of core devs and in the community, even though some core-devs
> are arguing against codifying that. I find it perfectly ok to strive for
> recognition in an unpaid job. The PSF is one way of giving out recognition,
> but it's not the only way. Being equal can sometimes be more valuable than
> being special.
>
> Regarding the process, I think it's good to have a grey zone in the ways
> how to become a core developer. It should be easy enough to not scare away
> candidates (because we need them!), but still have a bar that keeps people
> out who just want a nice title for their resume and then drop away after a
> couple of months.
>
> Why is that? Because there are costs associated with new core devs:
>
> 1) They need initial support and training, thus eating up the contributed
> time of other core developers. Adding new core devs should have the
> ultimate goal of *reducing* the time that others need to put into the
> project to get work done, not increase it.
>
> 2) Adding a new core dev increases the chance of dissent between people who
> can click merge buttons and revert commits. Managing groups of people is
> difficult, at least if there is more than one person involved.
>
> 3) Revoking the rights of a former contributor is a major social problem,
> thus leading to stale entries in the list of core-devs. (*)
>
> Thus, IMHO, the main questions to answer when deciding whether to add a new
> core dev are: 1) Is that person knowledgeable enough for the job and
> capable/expected to take over tasks from others? 2) Can that person be
> expected to participate in decision processes in a constructive way, and
> without starting merge wars? 3) Has that person been around for long enough
> to safely assume that it's not just a flash in the pan?
>
> Apart from that, given the social bar that someone has to promote a person
> (and probably wouldn't do that if that person is unlikely to pass the
> acceptance test), I think it's an acceptable process.
>
> It's a bet on the future, after all. Life and conditions change, and you
> can never be sure how a person will behave in a year's time, if that person
> will still be willing and capable of contributing then, or if that person
> will even be alive at all. Predictions are hard, especially about the
> future. We have to live with that, and adjust the tradeoffs accordingly.
>
> Stefan
>
>
>
> (*) The German language has the beautiful word "Karteileiche" for this,
> literally a dead body in a register.