[python-committers] Promote Mark Sapiro and Abhilash Raj as core developers

[Terry Reedy]

On 5/13/2019 7:11 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On May 13, 2019, at 01:14, Victor Stinner <vstinner at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>> I'm no longer sure myself that I can define them. I prefer to repeat
>> what others say :-) Basically, a core developers is someone who
>> produces commits :-) That's one definition.
> 
> But, IMHO not a correct one.

I think 'half complete' rather than 'not correct' is more accurate. 
There are two main effects of being granted 'core developer' status.

1. One may edit and merge PRs by onself or others into a python 
repository and in particular python/cypthon . This, expanded, is 
Victor's 'produce commits'.

2. One may participate in coredev-only discussions and votes.

These are the activities that differentiate of a 'core developer' and it 
is not wrong to say that a core developer is one who may do these.

>  The full quote from PEP 13:
> ——snip snip——
> Python core team members demonstrate:
> 
> • a good grasp of the philosophy of the Python Project
> • a solid track record of being constructive and helpful
> • significant contributions to the project's goals, in any form
> • willingness to dedicate some time to improving Python

This are qualities and history that once should have to become a core 
developer.  For producing commits, one should, in particular, understand 
the difference, as used here, between 'bug fix' and 'enhancement' and 
support the policy of not adding enhancements to x.y after x.y.0 (after 
.b1, actually).  (The devguide says something about this, but I don't 
know if it is clear enough.)

> As the project matures, contributions go beyond code. Here's an incomplete list of areas where contributions may be considered for joining the core team, in no particular order:

'may', not 'should' or 'must'.  Different existing coredevs may 
legitimately give these different weights.

> • Working on community management and outreach
...
> • Creating visual designs

Neither of these two speak to being qualified to produce commits.  Many 
of those I snipped do.

> Core team membership acknowledges sustained and valuable efforts that align well with the philosophy and the goals of the Python project.
> ——snip snip——

This sentence could be misinterpreted as saying that codedev status is 
an award for past contributions rather than an enabling greater future 
contributions.

Summarizing the general considerations, I have two questions for any 
candidate.

1. Do you want to become a core developer and do you intend to use the 
commit privilege?  If not, the question is not worth our time.

2. Do you understand our definition of 'bug fix' versus 'enhancement' 
and how and why the difference is important.  If not,
---

> I’m quite convinced that both Mark and Abhilash meet these requirements.  And they are almost by definition the experts in the email package.  You can certainly see the nature of their work in the Mailman repos, and I would be willing to mentor them through the first few commits to the CPython repo, though I think it will be mostly perfunctory.
> 
>> Having a sustainable Mailman project is great. But how does that
>> relate to Python itself? Are you talking about the email module? Do
>> Mark Sapiro and Abhilash Raj plan to maintain the email module?
> 
> Yes, that is the intent.
> 
>> In the meanwhile, they don't have to be core devs to help to maintain
>> the email module, no?
> 
> Do we have any core developers who want to maintain it?  Not me :) and apparently not RDM.

I searched the tracker for open issues with the email component marked. 
I was somewhat surprised to see 151, which is about the number for IDLE 
a few years ago.  We definitely need an active core developer working on 
email and team of two who can work together and check each other's work 
would be good.  (If and when we do, I can give suggestions, if asked, on 
managing such an intimidating pile.)

--
Terry