Python Gets New Governance Model (sdtimes.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Python Gets New Governance Model (sdtimes.com)

Posted by msmash on Thursday December 20, 2018 @08:50AM from the for-the-record dept.

The Python Software Foundation has settled on a new governance model for the programming language Python. The decision to come up with a new model was made after Python creator and chief Guido van Rossum stepped down as the "Benevolent Dictator For Life" (BDFL). SDTimes: The new governance model will rely on a five-person steering council to establish standard practices for introducing new features to the Python programming language. Based on tested methods, the proposal was designed to be "boring," comprehensive, flexible and lightweight, the steering council model document explained. "We're not experts in governance, and we don't think Python is a good place to experiment with new and untried governance models," software developers Nathaniel Smith and Donald Stufft explained in the Python documentation.

"So this proposal sticks to mature, well-known, previously tested processes as much as possible. The high-level approach of a mostly-hands-off council is arguably the most common across large successful F/OSS projects, and low-level details are derived directly from Django's governance." The steering council will serve as the "court of final appeal" for changes to the language and will have broad authority over the decision-making process, including the ability to accept or reject PEPs (Python Enhancement Proposals) (such as the one used to introduce this governance model), enforce and update the project's code of conduct, create subcommittees and manage project assets. But the intended goal of the council is to take a more hands-off and occasional approach to flexing its powers, Smith and Stufft explained.

64 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

fy by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 08:55 · Score: -1

fy
Bitter Frozen Urine by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 08:56 · Score: -1

Lets get the FP out of the way by bringing in CoC's, Hillary Clinton and the proper width of Tabs (8 spaces).
1. Re: Bitter Frozen Urine by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:00 · Score: -1
  
  I think this already happened in a previous article. We know the drill by now.
2. Re: Bitter Frozen Urine by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:02 · Score: -1
  
  Your fairy dusting of swear words is completely incidental to any coherent thought
3. Re:Bitter Frozen Urine by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 16:14 · Score: 0
  
  8 spaces? BURN THE HERETIC!
Great by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 08:58 · Score: 0

More Bracket Support
1. Re:Great by Hognoxious · 2018-12-20 11:14 · Score: 1
  
  It's a language for hipennials. If they followed your suggestion they'd probably swap opening and closing or match a right square with a left curly.
  It'd be almost as ugly as the bash case syntax.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Trump is also trying a new governance model... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:08 · Score: -1, Offtopic

"Lie, change your mind, fuck shit up, and go to prison." -TM
1. Re: Trump is also trying a new governance model... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:13 · Score: -1
  
  blah blah blah
Yup. Another one. by passionplay · 2018-12-20 09:11 · Score: 1

All power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. It's only a matter of time.
1. Re:Yup. Another one. by lgw · 2018-12-20 09:17 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  First order of business: the Python Code of Conduct!
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
2. Re: Yup. Another one. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:20 · Score: 0
  
  Too late for any of that. There will never be a python code of conduct. It is an extremely uncivilized language. There is only one way for that language to go
3. Re:Yup. Another one. by Desler · 2018-12-20 09:20 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  They already have one and the world didn't end.
  https://www.python.org/psf/cod...
4. Re:Yup. Another one. by lgw · 2018-12-20 09:23 · Score: 1
  
  That's not a code of conduct! It doesn't say anything about preferred gender pronouns, or diversity (well, it talks about diversity of experience, but we all know that's not what "diversity" means).
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
5. Re:Yup. Another one. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:33 · Score: 0
  
  Probably cause Python users were already used to being told what to do. You forced-indent nazi fucks.
6. Re:Yup. Another one. by Desler · 2018-12-20 09:36 · Score: 0
  
  Shitty trolling is shitty.
7. Re:Yup. Another one. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:39 · Score: 0, Offtopic
  
  Awww poor whittle, white boy incel. How dare women and dark-skinned people be treated with respect like they were actual human beings. Unconscionable!
8. Re:Yup. Another one. by ShanghaiBill · 2018-12-20 09:39 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  If CoCs are really so bad, then why do critics always need to wildly exaggerate them and make up strawman arguments?
  If you can't find anything real to criticise, perhaps it is because in reality they aren't an actual problem.
9. Re: Yup. Another one. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:48 · Score: 0
  
  What straw man?
10. Re:Yup. Another one. by fahrbot-bot · 2018-12-20 10:17 · Score: 1
  
  First order of business: the Python Code of Conduct!
  New Rule: Developers shall no longer drink Diet Coke or Coke Zero, only Tab or Tab Energy (when working late into the night).
  
  --
  It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
11. Re:Yup. Another one. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 11:01 · Score: 0
  
  I felt your post was offensive to straw men! Now grovel at my feet or be kicked off the project in a wild drama!
12. Re:Yup. Another one. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 13:32 · Score: 0
  
  Mo nibbaz ... mo feminazi ... more tran-zits ... we know what CoC means in the slimepaw hands of FOSS SJWs smash their Trotsky-slut faces ....
13. Re:Yup. Another one. by Cmdln+Daco · 2018-12-20 13:35 · Score: 1
  
  Hay, you're the one introducing scat to the thread.
14. Re:Yup. Another one. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 14:32 · Score: 0
  
  Shut up you god damn n1gger sow. Go rub some more dookie on your skin, we wouldn't want to mistake you for indian or south pacific
15. Re:Yup. Another one. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-21 09:31 · Score: 0
  
  The actual 'real' thing to criticize *is* the language used in the CoC itself, which people do and are generally correct about pointing out the flaws and mis-steps. Thinking any project *needs* one is asinine. It's only put forward by people that wish to control how other people behave, and nothing more. It's for noisy, bossy people, who generally contribute nothing to the project other than their 'opinions' rather than quality of work. Maybe if you put forward an idea about a CoC you need to actually have contributed significant work *first*, establishing that you're well invested in the project's health, so when you say something about the terms of the CoC you can be believed as being sincere, and not fall into the trap of 'I'm just doing this because I want to be bossy'.
16. Re:Yup. Another one. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-22 09:42 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe for the same reason its defenders can see no wrong with them, even when the awful intentions a CoC creator aimed to achieve with one was known well in advance.
Good thing they can't do this to C. by Seven+Spirals · 2018-12-20 09:21 · Score: -1

It's nice that there are enough implementations and variations of/on C that the SJWs can't easily subvert one guy or a small group and introduce their poison. I feel bad for these projects that get taken over and ruined like Debian. I wonder if this isn't the first step down the same road.
1. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:30 · Score: -1
  
  Republitard. Dude, it's fucking governed by the IEEE or some shit. You just don't get to see their code-of-conduct or whatever.
2. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by Phillip2 · 2018-12-20 10:12 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Or alternatively, this is the first step down the road to having a process which enables decisions to be made about what new features to be bought into python, following the departure of the original language developer from that role.
  It's also possible that SJW have managed to introduce their poison, by suggesting that a world where we are nice to each other is more pleasurable to live in than a world where we are not. It's a revolutionary idea and I understand why it has caused such a strong reaction.
3. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 10:31 · Score: 0
  
  Or alternatively, this is the first step down the road to having a process which enables decisions to be made about what new features to be bought into python, following the departure of the original language developer from that role.
  What is it with adding features to a programming language. Define the language at the outset and all non-core functionality is handled by libraries. But for goodness sake stop redefining the language itself. Python is already a hot mess with partial object-oriented features and notation mixed with procedural and functional features. (e.g.) object.size() or object.length() for all data types instead of the current object.length attribute for some, object.length() or object.len() for some others, and len(object) for still others? What a mess!
4. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by Seven+Spirals · 2018-12-20 10:31 · Score: -1
  
  Or alternatively, this is the first step down the road to having a process which enables decisions to be made about what new features to be bought into python, following the departure of the original language developer from that role.
  Well, it's at least possible, but it's also highly suspect given the current context/atmosphere. Still, after reading the actual proposed rules, most are just technical & legalistic. It at least does not come off as a blatant attempt at a CoC-inject.
  It's also possible that SJW have managed to introduce their poison, by suggesting that a world where we are nice to each other is more pleasurable to live in than a world where we are not. It's a revolutionary idea and I understand why it has caused such a strong reaction.
  So, is that to say that everyone who had a strong reaction isn't wanting a world where people are nice to each other? Is it nice to be a censor? Is it cool/fun to have your software rejected because someone's religious or cultural believes run over your project? That's the potential and it's hard to say "it wouldn't happen" the day that Debian pulled a weather-related software package out of their repo called "Weboobs".
5. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2018-12-20 10:43 · Score: 1
  
  Or alternatively, this is the first step down the road to having a process which enables decisions to be made about what new features to be bought into python, following the departure of the original language developer from that role.
  Because languages designed by committees and "steering councils" are so popular compared to the works of focused individuals. Oh, wait, they aren't...
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
6. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 11:05 · Score: 0
  
  There's nothing wrong with wanting a world where people are nice to each other, it's another thing to try and use force to achieve that and also frame anyone who opposes such a move as "wanting people to not be nice to each other".
7. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by Seven+Spirals · 2018-12-20 11:25 · Score: 2
  
  You didn't see ADA and OSI TP4 take off? Dude, where have you been? We totally all use DECNet PhaseV, now. I'm joking, of course (you have to say this on /.). You should check out this old page old ADA discussion. It's right in the same vein and fleshes out the reasons why committees almost always design pretty crappy technology even after better alternatives dominate. Remember the retards in the late 1990s who wanted to make OSI network stacks replace IPv4? They were such passionate handwaving assholes who just couldn't understand why the world didn't want to be told how to do technology by some group of passionate handwaving assholes. The more things change, the more they just fucking don't.
8. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by Seven+Spirals · 2018-12-20 11:28 · Score: 1
  
  They are learning at the PHP school of technology while taking a second major in Social Justice from UC Santa Barbara.
9. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by DNS-and-BIND · 2018-12-20 12:25 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  A world in which the far left's thought police watch everything we say and issue punishments? That's "being nice to each other"? I cannot understand why anyone would be on the SJW side. Even if you're far left. They'll attack you, too. Just ask Jamie Kilstein, who was so far left that he didn't just participate in SJW mobs, he led SJW mobs. Until the day the mobs turned on him.
  SJWs are a community that shares both an ideology of complete dissatisfaction with existing society due to its perceived "oppressive" nature and a desire to destroy that society because it's not perfect and SJWs consider it irredeemably depraved. I really think we're not bad and to destroy us would be a great crime, but keep cheering the SJWs because they're going to make us all nice.
  
  --
  Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
10. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by Seven+Spirals · 2018-12-20 13:25 · Score: 1
  
  Well written excellent points. Bravo.
11. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by grep+-v+'.*'+* · 2018-12-20 13:59 · Score: 1
  
  suggesting that a world where we are nice to each other is more pleasurable to live in than a world where we are not. It's a revolutionary idea
  Well you cretin, *I* don't like it. If you fucking believe that I've been rude to you, then you're completely mistaken -- I haven't.
  
  If I'm trying to be rude to you, you'll have absolutely no mistake about it.
  
  And even then, you can't be nice all of the time. And some events call for NOT being nice, or even mean, or even hateful.
  
  Besides, the current state of things seems like people aren't EVER allowed to grow from who they used to be. If you even said One Naughty Thing about someone once, you must then think that way forever -- even though you're a wise, worldly EIGHT at the time. Far be it you might change your mind about things as you grow 25% older, say to ten. Never mind puberty. Or getting a job where they give a paycheck and expect slightly more than breathing.
  
  --
  If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
12. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by HiThere · 2018-12-20 16:36 · Score: 1
  
  Wellll...... The problem here is that the language designer is retiring. Who do you trust to replace him?
  OTOH, Python *is* Free Software, so if anyone thinks he can do a better job, he can just fork it. I think we'll have a bit of a wait before that happens, though.
  And if you don't think that C has a standards committee that oversees language changes, you need to do a bit of research.
  
  --
  
  I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
13. Re: Good thing they can't do this to C. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 18:27 · Score: 0
  
  Why are social just-us nazis always the LEAST NICE people in the room?
14. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 18:38 · Score: 0
  
  Or alternatively, this is the first step down the road to having a process which enables decisions to be made about what new features to be bought into python, following the departure of the original language developer from that role.
  Because languages designed by committees and "steering councils" are so popular compared to the works of focused individuals. Oh, wait, they aren't...
  *cough*C++*cough* https://isocpp.org/std/the-committee *cough*
  I mean, it's only been commitee-designed for 20 years now, so you might have not noticed that Bjarne Stroustrup is no longer in charge.
15. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by goose-incarnated · 2018-12-20 20:43 · Score: 1
  
  It's also possible that SJW have managed to introduce their poison, by suggesting that a world where we are nice to each other
  
  If they wanted to suggest that, the various CoC efforts wouldn't argue against egalitarianism. The fact that egalitarians don't want anything to do with feminists and feminists don't want to be egalitarians tells you everything you need to know.
  
  --
  I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
16. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2018-12-20 20:58 · Score: 1
  
  I said "popular", not "pervasive"
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
17. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2018-12-20 21:00 · Score: 1
  
  ....a standard committee that rides the coattails of Messrs K&R?
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
18. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by AmiMoJo · 2018-12-20 22:08 · Score: 1
  
  I see the irony was lost on you.
  At this point SJWs are a conspiracy theory. A few isolated events used to construct an imaginary, existential threat. Remember when Debian was doomed because it adopted a CoC? And then Linux, and now Python? Sleeper cells I guess, laying CoC caches in preparation for the great purge. Linus is now a double agent.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
19. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by serviscope_minor · 2018-12-20 22:24 · Score: 2
  
  I cannot understand why anyone would be on the SJW side.
  Well indeed. That's because the "SJW" side is something that exists in the head of you, Mashiki, lgw and a few other assortd individuals. Even you lot can't agree between yourselves precisely what an SJW is except to acknowledge that they're really really bad.
  Like really bad.
  The reason that you can't understand why anyone would want to be on the side of an extreme straw man that exists only in fevered imaginations should be obvious: no one does. Your fantasies are not reality.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
20. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by cascadingstylesheet · 2018-12-21 02:32 · Score: 1
  
  It's also possible that SJW have managed to introduce their poison, by suggesting that a world where we are nice to each other is more pleasurable to live in than a world where we are not. It's a revolutionary idea and I understand why it has caused such a strong reaction.
  Yeah ... we're against people just being nice to each other. That's it! But you're on to us, thank goodness.
21. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by cascadingstylesheet · 2018-12-21 02:34 · Score: 0
  
  A world in which the far left's thought police watch everything we say and issue punishments? That's "being nice to each other"? I cannot understand why anyone would be on the SJW side. Even if you're far left. They'll attack you, too. Just ask Jamie Kilstein, who was so far left that he didn't just participate in SJW mobs, he led SJW mobs. Until the day the mobs turned on him.
  Well, to be fair, they're very nice to you as long as you simply comply with about 50,000 rules that are changing daily. (Obama's 2012 position on marriage is HATEFUL!!!!)
  Oh, and as long as you always say everything "correctly". Which, to be able to do, see above about the 50,000 rules that are changing daily.
22. Re: Good thing they can't do this to C. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-22 00:22 · Score: 0
  
  "SJW" is deprecated. The new term is "social just-us nazi".
23. Re:Good thing they can't do this to C. by Phillip2 · 2018-12-28 03:26 · Score: 1
  
  > Well you cretin, *I* don't like it. If you fucking believe that I've been rude to you, then you're completely mistaken -- I haven't.
  > If I'm trying to be rude to you, you'll have absolutely no mistake about it.
  The funny thing is that you think that, by being rude to me, you are making your point stronger. I don't think you are although I am not sure, because you are too busy using offensive terminology to actually have much of a point. In the end, though, I think you demonstrate my point; there are plenty of people on the internet happy to use aggressive, rude trolling, for no particular reason at all.
  > And some events call for NOT being nice, or even mean, or even hateful.
  Apparently, my post was one of them. If mild irony is enough to merit your mean and hateful post, then pretty much anything is.
Already banned in California by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:26 · Score: -1

The only way this five person committee will be legal in California is if (at least) one of the members belongs to each of the following groups:
1. Female
2. Trans
3. Non-Caucasian
4. Non-human identifying
Until these conditions are met California will outlaw Python and label all Python derived software packages as known to cause cancer.
1. Re: Already banned in California by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:29 · Score: 0
  
  Oh great, I think I will find my own chair and get my own popcorn
Don't be so dramatic snowflake by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:36 · Score: 0

I realize you're being hyperbolic but SB-826 doesn't apply to 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation like the Python Foundation, only to publicly held corporations [See Sec 2, 301.3 (f)(2)]. Never mind the fact that PF is headquartered in Delaware and not California. [See SEC 2, 301.3 (c)]
1. Re: Don't be so dramatic snowflake by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:51 · Score: -1
  
  More women directors serving on boards of directors of publicly held corporations will boost the California economy, improve opportunities for women in the workplace, and protect California taxpayers, shareholders, and retirees, including retired California state employees and teachers whose pensions are managed by CalPERS and CalSTRS.
  How does that even make sense. Where is their proof? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
2. Re: Don't be so dramatic snowflake by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 09:54 · Score: 0
  
  (1) âoeFemaleâ means an individual who self-identifies her gender as a woman, without regard to the individualâ(TM)s designated sex at birth.
  Says it all.
3. Re: Don't be so dramatic snowflake by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 11:43 · Score: 0
  
  citations were included in the report:
  * A 2016 McKinsey and Company study entitled “Women Matter” showed nationwide that companies where women are most strongly represented at board or top-management levels are also the companies that perform the best in profitability, productivity, and workforce engagement.
  * A 2017 study by MSCI found that United States’ companies that began the five-year period from 2011 to 2016 with three or more female directors reported earnings per share that were 45 percent higher than those companies with no female directors at the beginning of the period.
  * In 2014, Credit Suisse found that companies with at least one woman on the board had an average return on equity (ROE) of 12.2 percent, compared to 10.1 percent for companies with no female directors. Additionally, the price-to-book value of these firms was greater for those with women on their boards: 2.4 times the value in comparison to 1.8 times the value for zero-women boards.
  * A 2012 University of California, Berkeley study called “Women Create a Sustainable Future” found that companies with more women on their boards are more likely to “create a sustainable future” by, among other things, instituting strong governance structures with a high level of transparency.
  and more...
  You're free to disagree with the conclusions made. But there is some data and it has been cited. Please don't claim there is nothing when it's in the damn bill.
  
  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
  How is it extraordinary that diverse management leads to improved profits? Hell, if it made zero difference on profits it would still be worth doing. I'd argue that you have to prove that there is financial harm to stop this, the burden of proof is on those against the bill.
A little late, isn't it? by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2018-12-20 10:54 · Score: 1

One of the Pythons died a few decades ago; and the rest are in their 70s.

--
#DeleteChrome
1. Re:A little late, isn't it? by Hognoxious · 2018-12-20 11:08 · Score: 1
  
  Are any of them suffering from seNIlity?
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
2. Re:A little late, isn't it? by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2018-12-20 13:01 · Score: 1
  
  Are any of them suffering from seNIlity?
  With them... how could you tell?
  
  --
  #DeleteChrome
Groovy ready to be Java inter-operable. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 11:36 · Score: 0

Groovy as script is the rival of (J)Python, (J)Ruby, PHP and JavaScript together.
And with the care of brackets, it does not need the peril of the mistaken whitespaces/tab.
1. Re:Groovy ready to be Java inter-operable. by HiThere · 2018-12-20 16:39 · Score: 2
  
  Groovy is tied to Java, so it's not a plausible replacement. It's been decades, and nobody has seen fit to write a version that isn't tied to Java. This has advantages in certain use cases, but not in most of them.
  
  --
  
  I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
R.I.P. Python by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 11:42 · Score: 0

n/t
First objective by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-20 14:01 · Score: 0

Delete all Python code repositories and start a new version.
Errrr no, just delete it all.
Opaque and tricky by design by Anonymous Coward · 2018-12-21 01:39 · Score: 0

The audience of any professional software development is the next programmer to work on it, the principle of least surprise is the cornerstone of a good App, something the Python community snort at, it is opaque and tricky by design, because they think it gives them job security, it doesn't. The number of Python projects being replaced by Groovy and Java in the UK is pretty staggering, Groovy give all the advantages of Python, with a consistent mental model for the Java doing the heavy lifting.