[Python-Dev] PEP 3148 ready for pronouncement

[Guido van Rossum]

On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Jesse Noller <jnoller at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 9:59 AM, R. David Murray <rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 22 May 2010 19:12:05 +1000, Brian Quinlan <brian at sweetapp.com> wrote:
>>> On May 22, 2010, at 5:30 AM, Dj Gilcrease wrote:
>>> > On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 8:26 AM, Brian Quinlan <brian at sweetapp.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >> Except that now isn't the time for that discussion. This PEP has
>>> >> discussed
>>> >> on-and-off for several months on both stdlib-sig and python-dev.
>>> >
>>> > I think any time till the PEP is accepted is a good time to discuss
>>> > changes to the API
>>>
>>> I disagree. If a PEP is being updated continuously then there is
>>> nothing stable to pronounce on.
>>
>> Well, you've been making updates as a result of this round of
>> discussion.
>>
>> If there is still discussion then perhaps the PEP isn't ready for
>> pronouncement yet.  At some point someone can decide it is all
>> bikeshedding and ask for pronouncement on that basis, but I don't
>> think it is appropriate to cut off discussion by saying "it's ready for
>> pronouncement" unless you want increase the chances of its getting
>> rejected.
>
> I commiserate with Brian here - he's been very patient, and has been
> working on things, taking in input, etc for awhile now on this. In his
> mind, it is done (or at least incredibly close to done) and opening
> the door in the conversation for more API nit picking and debate about
> the exact verbiage on method names means we're never going to be done
> splashing paint.
>
>> The usual way of doing this (at least so far as I have observed, which
>> granted hasn't been too many cases) is to say something like "I think
>> this PEP is ready for pronouncement" and then wait for feedback on that
>> assertion or for the pronouncement.  It's especially good if you can answer
>> any concerns that are raised with "that was discussed already and we
>> concluded X".  Bonus points for finding a thread reference and adding
>> it to the PEP :)
>
> While sure, this is true - I'd actually back Brian up on trying to
> avoid more "why didn't you call it a banana" style discussions. At
> some point the constant back and forth has to stop, and to his credit,
> Brian has made a lot of changes, listened to a lot of feedback, etc.
> It's fair for him to just ask that a decision be made.

Great points Jesse! Since I really don't have the time or expertise to
make a judgment on this PEP, I hereby appoint you chair of the
approval process for this PEP. That basically means that when you
think it's ready to be approved, you say so, and it's a done deal. The
remaining feedback cycle is up to you now -- it sounds like you're
ready for closure, which sounds good to me (again, without having read
the PEP or tried to write something using the proposed code). You can
do it however you like: you can declare it approved now, or read it
over once more yourself and suggest some final changes, or set a
period (e.g. 48 hours) during which final comments have to be
received, which you then will judge by merit or by your whim, or you
can flip a coin or say a prayer... (I've tried most of those myself in
the past and haven't done too badly if I say so myself. :-) You're the
boss now. I know you will do the right thing for this PEP.

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)