[Python-Dev] Two small PEP ideas (original) (raw)

Guido van Rossum guido at python.org
Fri Sep 3 06:23:15 CEST 2010

On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettinger at gmail.com> wrote:

On Apr 30, 2010, at 12:51 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: Without a BDFL, I think we need a committee to make decisions, e.g. by majority vote amongst committers. I like Guido's idea.  Just appoint have one of the experienced developers who is independent of the proposal and have them be the final arbiter. For example, Guido had earlier suggested that I decide the fate of the "yield from" proposal because I had experience in the topic but was not not personally involved in the proposal. Guido has set a good example for others to follow: * let a conversation evolve until an outcome is self-evident * or kill it early if it has no chance * or if discussion teases out all of the meaningful thinking but doesn't reach a clear conclusion, just make a choice based on instinct * have biases toward real-world use cases, towards ideas proven in other languages (category killers),  towards slow rates of language evolution, and think about the long-term. It is better to have one experienced developer decide than to have a committee.

+1.

BTW, Barry just asked me about PEP 3149 and we decided to leave the ultimate decision to Georg and Benjamin. That's about as large a committee I'd be comfortable to appoint for any specific PEP.

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

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list