Home Original page

[python-committers] Language moratorium

Tim Peters tim.peters at gmail.com
Wed Jul 18 22:23:47 EDT 2018 
[Barry]

> I agree that we’ll effectively have language moratorium until we have a
> new governance structure.


Unsure!  Governance is needed to resolve conflict.  When there's broad
agreement, "leaders" aren't really needed.  For example, there's been a bit
of talk on python-ideas about adding a new `intmath` module capturing some
frequently reinvented functions for which decent implementations are known
but non-obvious (e.g., for generating the primes).  Nobody could sanely
fight to death against something like that.  Even whining about it would
appear petty ;-)


But let me ask, what do you propose to do about PEP 572?  That’s already
> been accepted, but not yet implemented.  Would it be exempt from the
> moratorium or scoot in under the wire?


Unless "accepted" has a meaning with which I'm unfamiliar, "exempt" is the
obvious answer.  Changing to such an unfamiliar meaning would require the
very governance structure whose present existence is denied by the case
hypothesis ;-)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20180718/acdafb89/attachment.html>
More information about the python-committers mailing list