Python gets a new governance model • Hacker News Board

Re: Python gets a new governance model

#141

Post by xamuel » Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 7:08 PM UTC

claudiawerner wrote: post #114

xamuel wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zizek isn't a philosopher, he's an entertainer disguised as a philosopher. His entire schtick is: take something common sense, declare the opposite is true, and do so in a profound-sounding way with lots of eccentric gesturing and lisping. Chomsky on Zizek [1]: Posturing. There's no theory in any of this stuff. Try to find in all [Zizek's work] some principles from which you can deduce...empirically testable proposit…

I've come across a comment almost exactly like this before on HN; was it you who posted it? Zizek does entertain, but most popular writers also entertain, and entertainment is not mutually exclusive with philosophy. He is respected within philosophy (and Chomsky is not a philosopher, as much respect I have for him too) and widely cited. The inversion of common sense things is precisely the aim of critical theory. Gra…

He's a pop philosopher and a genius at cultivating followership, but he doesn't really have productive ideas (at least not ideas whose results you couldn't explain in 5 minutes to a 12 year old, to borrow Chomsky's language).

Take a saying of Zizek and route it through a robotic voice (to eliminate his accent and mannerisms). Do the same to the negation of same. Play the results to a random population. The genuine saying of Zizek will not statistically stand out as being any more valuable than its negation.

Re: Python gets a new governance model

#142

Post by ksec » Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 7:09 PM UTC

I have to confess, I was always envy of Python. Look at those PEPs! Yes it may be a little too formal, but there are lots of PEPs, many discussions, and progress. Well the word progress might not be entirely correct, but lots of activities. Look at Guido! He was always on the front battling, arguing or trying to steer the ship. Look at Python and Data Science, it went from good programming language to learn to must have for Data Scientist and Machine Learning. PyPy!

I have to confess, I was very envy of Python. I wish Ruby had something similar to PEPs, many more suggestions, Matz making more decisions, Ruby entering more Domains. Ruby could have grown itself 5x and its usage will still possibly be counted as a niche language. MJIT!

That was until past few months.

It wasn't until Guido Steps down from being BDFL for Python, before the simplest question pops, What happens to Ruby if Matz suddenly step down because of a similar "lively" discussions on features? And now looking at this "governance model", the bureaucratic nature of it. Makes me appreciate a lot more of how Ruby is being handled.

This isn't to say the Python model is wrong, far form it. Java have a similar model and it is brilliant.

During one of the recent talks Matz said he is already starting to work on Ruby 4.0, which is not about features or speed, but testing a model of future Ruby without Matz when he retire. He is enjoying life, and he is still having fun, but it will come a day when he retires, so he is preparing for it. Despite their syntax being somewhat similar, Ruby's values and culture that makes it a lot different to Python.

Re: Python gets a new governance model

#143

Post by airstrike » Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 7:21 PM UTC

village-idiot wrote: post #130

airstrike wrote: post #126

I find it fascinating that programmers like to discuss governance at such great lengths without any reference to the vast knowledge of Political Theory that lies at their fingertips. At the end of the day, I suppose this is simply yet another form of NIH

I think it goes beyond NIH, although NIH certainly part of the problem. I think the moment political theory is mentioned, the response is basically that politics are gross and we should do better than that. This appears to stem from the idea that politics and all the negative aspects of it stem from some location other than people haggling over limited resources. This thought process is both ridiculously naive and a…

You put it much more eloquently than I ever could. Thanks and couldn't agree more...

Re: Python gets a new governance model

#144

Post by bayindirh » Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 7:22 PM UTC

ksec wrote: post #142

I have to confess, I was always envy of Python. Look at those PEPs! Yes it may be a little too formal, but there are lots of PEPs, many discussions, and progress. Well the word progress might not be entirely correct, but lots of activities. Look at Guido! He was always on the front battling, arguing or trying to steer the ship. Look at Python and Data Science, it went from good programming language to learn to must h…

When you need to inherit something that big (a corporation, programming language, a missle, etc.), you need to make sure that it won't be cannibalized or just killed outright. So you delegate your powers to a group of optimal number of people.

Yes it's boring, yes it's slow, yes it's bureaucratic, but it's realistic and pragmatic. Python will continue to grow if they can run this governance model well. They can become debian of the programming languages.

Re: Python gets a new governance model

#145

Post by therealdrag0 » Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 7:27 PM UTC

airstrike wrote: post #126

I find it fascinating that programmers like to discuss governance at such great lengths without any reference to the vast knowledge of Political Theory that lies at their fingertips. At the end of the day, I suppose this is simply yet another form of NIH

NIH? Only thing I know is `National Institutes of Health`, of which I don't see a relation.

Re: Python gets a new governance model

#146

Post by aftbit » Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 7:37 PM UTC

therealdrag0 wrote: post #145

airstrike wrote: post #126

I find it fascinating that programmers like to discuss governance at such great lengths without any reference to the vast knowledge of Political Theory that lies at their fingertips. At the end of the day, I suppose this is simply yet another form of NIH

NIH? Only thing I know is `National Institutes of Health`, of which I don't see a relation.

"Not Invented Here"

Re: Python gets a new governance model

#147

Post by maxnoe » Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 7:38 PM UTC

therealdrag0 wrote: post #145

airstrike wrote: post #126

I find it fascinating that programmers like to discuss governance at such great lengths without any reference to the vast knowledge of Political Theory that lies at their fingertips. At the end of the day, I suppose this is simply yet another form of NIH

NIH? Only thing I know is `National Institutes of Health`, of which I don't see a relation.

Not Invented Here (Syndrom)

Re: Python gets a new governance model

#148

Post by iosonofuturista » Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 7:40 PM UTC

throwawaymath wrote: post #132

iosonofuturista wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So by your logic, Microsoft and Apple make better OSes than Linux by several orders of magnitude.

In terms of out of the box stability and support? Yes, absolutely. The power and flexibility of Linux comes with the cost of a much lower floor for stability than proprietary operating systems. You can make a rock solid system using Linux, but that requires nontrivial effort and knowledge. I have yet to see an issue on my personal Windows and macOS machines that approached e.g. package management hell on Linux, in te…

I don't really desagree with you [0].

I was merely poking holes on parent's theory that more paid engineers and a bigger market cap, somehow justify better technical decisions. That's a dubious thing to say and if extend the logic to the OS level it should be apparent.

[0] I use Windows, Mac OS, Linux (and Android, iOS) all the time, and honestly they all get the job done, but all suck in particular and annoyingly unique ways. So I don't really agree with you either.

Re: Python gets a new governance model

#149

Post by iosonofuturista » Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 7:49 PM UTC

throwawaymath wrote: post #132

iosonofuturista wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So by your logic, Microsoft and Apple make better OSes than Linux by several orders of magnitude.

In terms of out of the box stability and support? Yes, absolutely. The power and flexibility of Linux comes with the cost of a much lower floor for stability than proprietary operating systems. You can make a rock solid system using Linux, but that requires nontrivial effort and knowledge. I have yet to see an issue on my personal Windows and macOS machines that approached e.g. package management hell on Linux, in te…

Can't seem to be able to edit on mobile:

I meant that the logic fault should be apparent even for a free software advocate, that more resources and paid programmers do not necessary mean better solutions.

So the excuse that red hat has more resources therefore a better process than Debian should not really mean anything for someone I suspect is a free software advocate (the GP)

Re: Python gets a new governance model

#150

Post by ubernostrum » Wed, Dec 19, 2018, 7:50 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #6

Councils, committees, multiple obtuse voting systems, governance documents, 'courts' of appeal... Why are they so keen to construct such a grim bureaucracy for themselves?

The new Python model is pretty similar to what Django has been using for years (and even admits that it copy/pasted significant chunks of text from our model). I didn't realize how grim things were!

I've served on Django's technical board -- its equivalent of the new Python "steering council" -- for several years. The technical board has the following responsibilities:

* Act as a final tiebreaker for any decision that the dev mailing list can't manage to make through normal discussion

* Review major proposals for changing Django or Django's processes (DEPs, our equivalent of Python's PEPs), with the ability to veto

* Review proposals to add new Django committers, with the ability to veto

The first category has never, as far as I can tell, come up, and for the other two the technical board has never vetoed a committer or a DEP. There also aren't many of them -- 24 in a bit over four years.

I'm trying to push through a significant change to how Django works, but it wouldn't do away with the technical board; instead it acknowledges that the in-practice way Django runs -- discussion on the dev mailing list, open to everyone, with a couple people whose job is to merge PRs -- is working well enough that we no longer need to give special privileges to a large group of committers.