Home Original page

[python-committers] Github reviews are cannibalizing BPO

M.-A. Lemburg mal at egenix.com
Tue May 2 03:36:02 EDT 2017 
On 02.05.2017 04:25, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 2 May 2017 at 08:32, Christian Heimes <christian at python.org> wrote:
>> This brings me to my questions
>>
>> 1) Should we try to move discussion back to BPO or are we fine with
>> having major decisions just in Github PRs?
>>
>> 2) How can we retain enough information on BPO to keep it useful as
>> research database for past decisions?
> 
> It's OK to have the discussions on GitHub, but one of the
> responsibilities of reviewers is to ensure that significant design
> decisions are summarised on the related tracker issue for future
> reference.

I don't think that's a good idea, since the core devs then
have to check what's good discussion to have on Github PRs
and what not.

IMO, it's much easier for everyone to just always point people
to BPO for discussions and keep PRs reserved for code reviews.

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com

Professional Python Services directly from the Experts (#1, May 02 2017)
>>> Python Projects, Coaching and Consulting ...  http://www.egenix.com/
>>> Python Database Interfaces ...           http://products.egenix.com/
>>> Plone/Zope Database Interfaces ...           http://zope.egenix.com/
________________________________________________________________________

::: We implement business ideas - efficiently in both time and costs :::

   eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH  Pastor-Loeh-Str.48
    D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg
           Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611
               http://www.egenix.com/company/contact/
                      http://www.malemburg.com/
More information about the python-committers mailing list