Zitat von Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net>:


One cruel example is the set of PEP 3121 / PEP 384 refactorings done by
Robin Schreiber:

I personally dont consider it failed, yet. I still plan to integrate
them, hopefully for 3.4.

Robin has produced many patches that seem to reach the stated goal
(refactor C extension modules to take advantage of the latest PEPs
about module initialization and extension types definition).
Unfortunately, tackling both goals at the same time produces big
patches with a lot of churn; and it is also not obvious the PEP 384
refactoring is useful for the stdlib (while the PEP 3121 refactoring
definitely is).

Choice of supporting PEP 384 was deliberate. It will change all
types into heap types, which is useful for multiple-interpreter
support and GC.


What didn't produce an alarm during Robin's work is that GSoC work is
done in private.

It wasn't really done in private. Robin posted to python-dev, anybody
who would have been interested could have joined discussions.

It is also
likely that the mentor gets overworked after the GSoC period is over,
is unable to finalize the patch and push it, and other core devs have a
hard time catching up on the work and don't know what the shortcomings
are.

It's indeed unfortunate that RL interfered with my Python contributions.
I apologize for that.

However, anybody who wanted to catch up could have
contacted Robin or myself. As overworked as we all are,
nobody did.

Regards,
Martin




_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to